Delmar Gardens North
4401 Parker Road, Black Jack, MO 63033 · For profit - Corporation · 240 certified beds · (314) 355-1516 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0610), cited Jul 2024
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $39,299 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-10)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 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 | 3 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 held steady at 2 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 | 13.3% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.7% | 5.3% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.7% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.1% | 2.3% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.6% | 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 | 3.2% | 4.1% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.7% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.7% | 25.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.9% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.8% | 4.5% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.3% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.6% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 63.5% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.0% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 22.1% | 13.7% | 12.0% | 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.
50.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 120 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.4% 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 59 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. 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 | 50.6%CMS range 38.6–61.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 7.7–13.7 | 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 | 25.4% | 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 | 28.8% | 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 | 23.7% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 93.3% | 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 | 12.3% | 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 | 6.3%CMS range 3.1–10.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.67 | 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 240 beds and averages 177.3 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 63 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.56 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.18 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.55 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.68 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.21 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as 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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-02-10 · 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 maintain an environment as free of accident hazards as possible and to provide supervision and assistance to prevent falls for five of seven sampled residents (Residents #1, #3, #4, #5 and #6) by not implementing care planned fall interventions. On 12/31/24 Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) A failed to place Resident #1's bed in a low position. Resident #1 was found screaming and hanging off the bed holding onto the grab rail. A nurse assisted the resident to the floor. The resident sustained bilateral (both sides) fractured femurs (thighbones). The facility failed to complete post fall neurological (neuro) assessments (a series of questions and tests to check brain, spinal cord, and nerve function) as ordered by the physician and in accordance with the facility's policy for seven out of seven sampled residents (Residents #1, #3, #4, #5 #6 and #7), and failed to complete post fall follow-up documentation each shift for 72 hours after falls 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-11-02 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 staff followed their Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, Freedom From policy by failing to immediately notify the Administrator/Designee or Director of Nurses (DON)/Designee and promptly begin an investigation regarding one resident's allegation on 10/24/23 around 4:30 P.M. to 5:00 P.M., of being slapped or hit in the face/mouth by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) A. In addition, the facility failed to ensure CNA A was immediately suspended from work pending the results of an investigation. CNA A continued to work on 10/24/23 until 10:38 P.M., returned to the facility on [DATE], and worked from 6:34 A.M. until 3:27 P.M., before being suspended from work. Six residents were sampled and problems were identified with one (Resident #3). The census was 145. Review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, Freedom From policy dated 1/2019 and last revised 9/2022, showed: -Resident Safety Position Statement, included the following: -It is 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-11-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 staff followed their Condition Change, of the Resident policy. On the morning of 10/9/23, Nurse O (the day shift nurse) documented the night shift nurse reported at shift change one resident had a low blood pressure (BP), the physician was notified and gave orders to encourage fluids. The night shift nurse failed to document in the progress notes and/or on an SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation, assessment tool) communication form, the date or time the resident's BP was low, what the BP was, or the physician's order. In addition, Nurse O failed to document on-going assessments/monitoring of the resident throughout the day. On 10/9/23 at 5:00 P.M., the resident's family visited and requested the resident be sent to the hospital. The resident was admitted to the hospital on [DATE], with a temperature of 102.2 Fahrenheit (F) and a diagnoses of urosepsis (a blood infection caused by a urinary tract infection (UTI)) and…
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 · Ecited before2025-11-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents were treated with dignity and respect, ensuring their comfort, privacy, and personal rights are always upheld, when staff did not knock or announce their presence before entering the rooms of Residents #36, #50, #72, and #84, violating their right to privacy, when Residents #1, #2 and #28 were not provided with call lights within reach, limiting their ability to communicate their needs promptly and when staff failed to adjust the dining room temperature to a comfortable level, compromising their comfort for Residents #26, #72, #145, and #164. This affected the dignity standards to guarantee residents' physical comfort, autonomy, and respect in daily care for nine of 36 sampled residents. The census was 171. Review of the facility's undated Resident Right policy, showed:-Dignity and Respect: Resident has the right to expect the surroundings are safe, clean, and comfortable;-Privacy and Confidentiality: Resident has 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 · Ecited before2025-11-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 maintain a clean or organized medication cart and storage rooms within the facility. Four out of seven carts were checked. Staff failed to ensure proper storage and labels on medications on four Certified Medication Technician (CMT) medication carts. The census was 171. Review of the facility's Medication Storage Policy, dated December 2021, showed:-Drugs and medications are to be stored in the original container in which they were received;-Only the charge nurse or medication nurse has access to the narcotics keys,-Now discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or medications will be stored in the facility over thirty (30) days.-Medications which require refrigeration are kept in the refrigerator in the locked medication room. Drugs stored under the refrigeration are stored separately from food, -Compartments and areas containing drugs are locked when not in use or when left unattended. Such areas included drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts and boxes. 1. Observation of the 100-hall medication…
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 · D2025-11-17 · 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 ensure a resident's Against Medical Advice (AMA) discharge was documented in the medical record and appropriate information was communicated to the resident and/or responsible party. The facility also failed to maintain a copy of a signed AMA discharge form for one of three residents reviewed for voluntary and involuntary discharge procedures (Resident #178). The census was 171. Review of facility's admission Agreement, showed: -You may voluntarily end this admission Agreement and leave our facility at any time by giving us seven days advance written notice. If you leave against the advice of your physician, you agree to assume full responsibility of all results that follow. You also agree to pay all outstanding charges before you leave. If you die while in our facility, we will honor your wishes and provide assistance to your Resident Representative or to whomever is responsible for making all funeral arrangements.Review of Resident #178'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 before2025-11-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 document assessments and failed to contact the resident's physician regarding a change of condition for one sampled resident (Resident #11). The sample was 36. The census was 171. Review of the facility's policy, Following Physician's Orders, dated 6/29/21, showed:-Purpose: It is the policy of the community to ensure that all Licensed Professional Nurses (LPNs) Registered Nurses (RNs) and other healthcare professionals, follow physicians in accordance with State, Federal regulations and their respective practice acts.-Procedure: All physicians orders will be followed as prescribed and if not followed, the reason shall be recorded on the resident's medical record;--If an order is questionable according to the seven Rights of Medications Administration, a clarification order will be obtained;--All physician or other health care professional's verbal, telephone or written orders will be immediately entered by the nurse obtaining the order. Review of the facility's policy, Wound Management for 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 before2025-11-17 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 2 of 6 sampled residents the facility identified with a catheter (medical device to allow for voiding) received appropriate catheter care. The facility failed to ensure one resident's catheter was stored properly while the resident was in bed (Resident #2) and failed to ensure one resident received proper catheter care (Resident #55). The sample was 36. The census was 171. Review of the facility's catheter care policy, dated 3/2021, showed:-Purpose: To keep indwelling catheter free of discharge and/or crusting which can cause infections;-Procedure: Check tubing for positioning. Coil on bed. Attach catheter bag to bed frame only.-Male catheter procedure: Apply gloves. Place protective pad or towel under the resident. Avoid unnecessary exposure. Moisten wash cloth with soap and water. Clean the catheter from the opening of the urethra outward four (4) inches, or farther if needed. Do not pull on the catheter. If the male 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 before2025-11-17 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 two residents received gastrostomy tube (a tube surgically inserted into the abdomen, used for liquid nutrition, fluids and medications) feedings at the specified times ordered by the physician (Residents #1 and #55). The sample was 36. The census was 171. Review of the facility's Tube Feeding policy, revised June 2021, showed:-Purpose: to deliver a continuous, regulated drip feeding to gastrostomy tube (g-tube) fed residents using an enteral pump;-Procedure: -Equipment: Enteral pump, enteral feeding bag and administration set; prescribed feeding; and a pole; -Review the physician's orders; The order should specify the amount and type of formula, and the flow rate. Review of the facility's Following Physician Orders policy, dated 6/29/21, showed:-Purpose: It is the policy of the community to ensure that all licensed professional nurses and other healthcare professionals, follow physician orders in accordance to state and federal…
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 · D2024-12-26 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) care assistance for a dependent resident (Resident #1), during the evening shift on 12/3/24 and the overnight shift from 12/3/24 to 12/4/24. The sample was five. The census was 172. The Administrator was notified on 12/26/24, of the past non-compliance. The facility disciplined various staff members who failed to provide ADL care to the resident. The facility in-serviced current employees on the topics of rounding on residents, customer service, abuse and neglect, and grooming. The deficiency was corrected on 12/11/24. Review of Resident #1's Medical Record showed: -Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, diabetes and major depressive disorder; -Cognitively intact; -Resident required two staff members assistance with ADLs. Review of the resident's care plan, in use at the time of the investigation, showed: -Problem: The resident refuses to shower at times; -Goal: The resident will allow staff to assist him/her…
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 before2024-07-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 prevent further potential abuse, neglect or mistreatment by not investigating an injury of unknown origin for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1). The census was 95. Review of the facility's Injury of Unknown Source - Investigative Protocol policy, undated, showed: -Purpose: The following indicators of abuse/neglect are provided to help determine if abuse/neglect should be suspected. Staff are mandated to report suspected abuse; -Indicators of physical abuse may include injuries of an unknown source; -The attached worksheet and directions are offered to assist facilities in their internal investigation. If a logical/reasonable explanation of the source of the injury cannot be determined, notify your local state agency within 2 hours of discovery. Review of the facility's when to initiate an investigation document, undated, showed: -Contact Administrator and Nursing Administration immediately for the following events included for injury, actual or suspected. Examples included bruise of unknown…
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 before2024-07-26 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remained free of accident hazards by keeping an un-secured plastic container filled with insulin (used to control high blood sugar) pens (a small lightweight pen that is prefilled with insulin to inject under a person's skin) of 13 residents (Residents #2, #4, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15 and #16) on un-attended, unsupervised treatment/medication carts. The facility also had an open plastic tray with auto shield duo pen needles (needles used to inject insulin from the insulin pen) and lancets (a small device with a needle used to prick the surface of the skin to obtain a blood sample) with a sharps container (used to discard used lancets and auto shield duo pen needles) which had an unsecured plastic lid on top of the un-attended, un-supervised treatment/medication carts. The sample size was 16. The census was 95. Review of the facility's Storage of Drugs policy, undated, showed: -Compartments and areas containing drugs are locked when not in use or when left…
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 before2024-07-26 · 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, staff failed to demonstrate proper use of hand hygiene and proper infection control during wound care for two of three sampled residents (Residents #2 and #4). The census was 95. Review of the facility's Infection Control Policy, dated 12/2016, showed: -Purpose: The community has established and maintains an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections; -Develop prevention, surveillance, and control measures to protect residents and personnel from healthcare-associated infections; -Develop specific policies and procedures governing such activities as surveillance, standard and transmission based precautions, hand hygiene procedures to be followed by staff involved in direct resident contact, aseptic technique, outbreak investigation, wound care, catheter care, etc. to be followed to prevent the spread 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.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-10-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
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 observations, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure: 1. the high temperature dish machine met proper temperatures and 2. the staff maintained a clean kitchen including items in the storage areas for all 133 residents who received meals from the kitchen. These failures had the potential to lead to food-borne illness among all facility residents. Findings include: 1.Observations during the initial tour of the kitchen on 10/02/23 beginning at 9:31 AM with the Food Service Director (FSD) revealed: The hot water dishwasher temperatures of Wash was 152 Fahrenheit (F), the Rinse was 154 F, and the Final Rinse was 190F. At 9:35 AM, Dietary Aide (DA) 1 loaded another batch of dirty dishes onto the conveyor belt and dishwasher temperatures registered at Wash 130F, Rinse 156F, and Final Rinse of 190F. On 10/02/23 at 9:36 AM, DA1 placed another load of dirty bowls from breakfast onto the conveyor belt with the FSD observing. The dishwasher gauges measured the following…
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 · Ecited before2023-10-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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, interviews, review of manufacturer's instructions, policy review, and review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to train and ensure staff, including agency nurses, disinfected multi-use glucometers with an EPA registered disinfectant and removed used gloves for one of one resident observed receiving a fingerstick (Resident (R) 22) out of 39 residents receiving blood sugar monitoring. This failure increased the likelihood of transmission of blood-borne pathogens to residents receiving blood sugar monitoring. Findings include: During an observation on 10/05/23 at 8:12 AM, Registered Nurse (RN)1 approached the medication cart stating that the cart surface was clean from previous use. RN1 donned gloves gathered supplies and a glucometer. RN1 approached the resident, cleaned the resident's finger with an alcohol prep, allowed it to dry, and performed the fingerstick. She then touched the test strip with a drop of blood and read the results. RN1 then gathered the supplies, alcohol prep, used lancet, glucometer, and 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 · D2023-10-06 · 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 record review, interview and review of facility policies and procedures, the facility failed to ensure that two (Resident (R)72 and R247) of 31 sampled residents were informed and provided written information to formulate an advance directive. Findings include: 1. Review of R72'a Face Sheet located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Face Sheet tab revealed R72 had diagnoses of type II diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, non-pressure chronic ulcer, gangrene, and moderate protein calorie malnutrition. The resident was admitted on [DATE]. Further review of the EMR revealed a Code Status Form under the Miscellaneous tab labeled Advance Directive dated [DATE]. Review of R72's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE] in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the MDS tab indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated R72 was cognitively intact. An interview with the Social Services Director (SSD) on [DATE] at 3:00…
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 · D2023-10-06 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 interviews, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for one resident (Resident (R)100) of one resident reviewed for base line care plans out of 31 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of R100's Face Sheet located in the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) in the section titled Face Sheet revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included unspecified dementia, anxiety, psychotic disturbances, chronic pain, and generalized osteoarthritis. Review of R100's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/08/23 located in the resident's EMR section titled Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) revealed the resident had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score 14 out of 15 indicating the resident's cognition was intact. The MDS documented the resident had an unsteady gait but could stabilize with assistance and utilized a walker and…
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 · D2023-10-06 · 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 record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that care plans for one (Resident (R)96) was revised to reflect palliative services from a sampled 31 residents. Finding include: Review of R96's Resident Face Sheet located in the resident electronic medical records (EMR) section titled Face Sheet revealed the resident was admitted to the facility 12/16/22 with diagnoses that included acute kidney failure, pressure ulcers of the sacrum, diabetes mellitus type II, cerebral infarct with hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and dysphagia. Review of R96's monthly Physicians Orders located in the resident's EMR section titled Orders revealed the resident started to receive palliative services on 07/20/23. Review of R96's Resident's Progress Notes located in the resident's EMR section titled Documents revealed a note dated 07/20/23 that the resident was evaluated and admitted to palliative services. During an interview on 10/04/23 at 12:00 PM Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)5 revealed that palliative services provided the care plan for the resident.…
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 before2023-10-06 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 physician's orders and their policy by failing to ensure one resident's gastrostomy tube (g-tube, a tube inserted through the belly that brings nutrition directly to the stomach) feeding infused at the prescribed rate. In addition, the facility failed to ensure staff recorded a date/time on the package of a g-tube declogger (used to declog a g-tube) of when it was opened, and failed to ensure staff were aware of how long the g-tube declogger could be used prior to discarding it. The facility identified six residents with g-tubes. Four were sampled and problems were identified with one. (Resident # 1). The census was 138. Review of the facility Enteral Nutrition /Tube Feeding policy, dated 2014, showed: -Guideline: Enteral Nutrition (EN, a way of delivering nutrition directly to the stomach or small intestine) may be substituted for individuals who have an intact gastrointestinal tract but are unable or unwilling to take food by mouth in amounts that will support adequate nutrition. Examples are…
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 · D2023-10-06 · 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, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to promptly intervene when a resident's respiratory equipment was missing for one (Resident (R) 34) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care/oxygen of 31 sample residents. Findings include: Review of R34's electronic Face Sheet located in the Face Sheet tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included obstructive sleep apnea. Review of R34's electronic Active Orders located in the Orders tab of the EMR revealed R34 had the following physician's order dated 08/05/23 for bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP), a respiratory treatment used during sleep to treat obstructive sleep apnea every evening and night shift. 08/05/23: Wash CPAP [Continuous Positive Airway Pressure]/BiPAP mask/tubing/humidifier chamber with warm soapy water. Air dry. Once a day on Sun. During observation and interview with R34 on 10/03/23 at 9:15 AM a BiPAP…
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 · D2023-10-06 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interview and review of facility policy, the facility Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) program failed to identify problems with the admission process in that Advance Directives were not offered to two (Residents (R)247 and R333) from a sampled 31 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of R247's Resident Face Sheet located in the resident's electronic medical records (EMR) section titled Face Sheet revealed the resident was admitted to the facility 12/29/22 with diagnoses that included non-Alzheimer's dementia, diabetes type II, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, benign prostate hyperplasia, anxiety disorder and depression. Review of R247's Advance Directives located in the resident's EMR section titled Documents revealed the resident did not have an Advance Directive. 2. Review of R333 Resident Face Sheet located in the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) section titled Face Sheet revealed the resident was admitted to the facility 10/16/20 with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus type II, peripheral vascular…
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 · Fcited before2020-01-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
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 and interview, the facility failed to label and properly store opened food items and maintain the cleanliness of the deep fryer, stove, griddle, soup kettle, oven and kitchen floor during four of five days of observation. This deficient practice affected all residents who ate at the facility. In addition, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff were logging the temperatures of the refrigerators located in the kitchenettes. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. 1. Observation of the kitchen area on 1/2/20 at 8:23 A.M., showed: -An opened, unsealed and unlabeled bag of what appeared to be frozen chicken in the walk in freezer; -An opened, unsealed bag of frozen beef patties in the walk in freezer; -The deep fryer had a build-up of what appeared to be grease and brown, caked-on food on the sides of both of fryers; -The griddle had a build-up of dirt and grease at the front of the griddle; -The stove-top had a build-up of an ash like substance. The front of the stove had what…
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 · Ecited before2020-01-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life when staff left a resident exposed to the hall, talked disrespectfully to a resident, and called a resident's brief a diaper. One resident voiced staff frequently talk disrespectfully to residents (Residents #532, #284, #30 and #147). The census was 216 with 180 residents in certified beds. 1. Observation on 1/7/20 at 7:48 A.M., showed Resident #532 sat in his/her room on the side of the bed and faced the room door. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) B, assisted the resident to dress. The privacy curtain was partially pulled but the resident was still visible from hall and exposed from the waist up. During an interview on 1/8/20 at 9:41 A.M., with the Director of Nursing (DON) and assistant administrator, the DON said complete visual privacy should be provided to residents.…
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 · E2020-01-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — patternKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 personal privacy during personal care for one resident (Resident #147). In addition, the facility failed to ensure privacy and confidentiality of resident personal and medical records during three of four days of dining room observations in three of four unit dining rooms on certified halls. The sample was 35. The census was 216 with 180 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #147's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 11/20/19, showed: -Diagnoses included seizure disorder; -Total assistance required for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review of the resident's care plan, in use at the time of the survey, showed: -Category: Communication: Resident has difficulty with communication, non-verbal related to intellectual disability: -Staff will utilize alternative methods of communication to enhance resident's understanding of need and direction. Speak in low, slow voice. Give clear, simple…
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 · E2020-01-08 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 the services provided or arranged by the facility meet professional standards of quality, by failing to ensure staff followed facility policy after a resident's fall (Resident #38) and failing to follow the facility policy regarding weights that were outside of baseline range (Resident #153). In addition, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for one resident (Resident # 8), who had an order to wear a left elbow brace. The sample was 35. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. 1. Review of instructions unlicensed staff should follow when a resident is found on the floor, and reviewed with staff during their orientation, showed: I have received information and education on the fall policy and procedures for residents. I understand that it is everyone's job to make sure that residents are safe in our facility. If a resident falls it is my responsibility to make sure that the resident is safe: -Call the nurse 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 · E2020-01-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation, for five of five narcotic count books reviewed on three of four certified halls. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. Review of the facility's Controlled Substance Audit policy, revised 2015, showed: -Purpose: To keep accurate records of all controlled substances in accordance with state and federal laws; -The Controlled Medication Shift Audit Record will be signed by the on/off going nurse/certified medication technician (CMT), inventory together at change of shift; -If non-compliance is found in the documentation of controlled substances staff will be required to date and initial medication cards each time it is administered until substantial compliance is achieved; -On-coming Charge Nurse/CMT will count the drugs. Off-going Charge Nurse/CMT will follow and verify the record; -All controlled drugs will be counted between each shift for safe, accurate accountability; -All…
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 · Ecited before2020-01-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 safe medication storage included the provision of appropriate environmental controls in three of four medication storage rooms utilized by residents in certified beds. Staff failed to ensure one medication refrigerator had functional thermometers (100 hall) and that staff monitored the refrigerator temperatures in three medication room refrigerators (100, 200 and 500 halls). In addition, facility staff stored drinks in one medication refrigerator (200 hall). The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. Review of the facility's Medication Storage policy, dated August 2018, showed: -Purpose: To ensure all medications are stored in accordance with state and federal regulations, all medications and biologicals are stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and only authorized personnel have access to keys; -Medications which require refrigeration are kept in a refrigerator in the locked medication room. Drugs stored under refrigeration are stored separately from food. All refrigerated…
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 · Ecited before2020-01-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff used acceptable infection control procedures during personal care for two of three residents observed receiving care (Residents #10 and #80). In addition, the facility failed to ensure they had signs posted at the entrance requesting visitors not to enter if they were experiencing a cold or the flu or had symptoms of either and the facility had no personal protection supplies such as gloves or masks for visitors to use if they chose to visit while experiencing cold or flu symptoms or if the facility was experiencing an outbreak among the residents. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. Review of the facility's Nursing Competencies, dated 1/2017, showed: -Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to ensure all nursing staff receives: Comprehensive, standardized training and continuing education in order to perform their jobs and enhance their knowledge and skills. A competency; -Policy: #6. Competencies will be evaluation and documented…
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 · D2020-01-08 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident's status at the time the assessment was completed for three residents (Residents #153, #147, and #183). The sample was 35. The census was 216 with 180 residents in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #153's weight documentation, showed: -On 5/5/19, 179 pounds (lbs); -On 8/6/19, 173.8 lbs; -On 10/6/19, 174.6 lbs; -On 11/17/19, 151.8 lb, flagged red; -Weight change from 5/5/19 to 11/17/19, indicated a weight loss of 15.19% in 6 months; -Weight change from 8/6/19 to 11/17/19, indicated a weight loss of 12.65% in 3 months; -Weight change from 10/6/19 to 11/17/19, indicated a weight loss of 13% in 1 month. Review of the facility's Weight Monitoring policy, revised 11/2018, showed: -Purpose: To obtain accurate weight of each resident and maintain control of weight changes; -Significant weight loss is defined as loss of 5% or more in 30 days, 7.5% or more in 3 months or 10% or more in 6…
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 · D2020-01-08 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 resident with pressure ulcers (injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue, as a result of pressure or friction) receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, for one resident who developed a wound (Resident #153). The facility failed to monitor and documented the progress of the wound and/or notify the physician until two weeks after first identified, when the wound failed to respond to the ordered treatment. The facility identified 14 residents as having pressure ulcers. The sample was 35. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. Review of the facility's Pressure Ulcer Care and Documentation policy, revised 12/2006, showed: -Purpose: To prevent pressure ulcers and/or prevent deterioration of existing pressure ulcers; -Observe daily for the following signs of potential decubitus (pressure ulcers) and report accordingly: Redness or darker, deeper bruise-like color; heat;…
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 before2020-01-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 resident with an indwelling urinary catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) received care consistent with accepted standards of practice to prevent urinary tract infections and complications when a staff person held the catheter bag above bladder level during care (Resident #147). In addition, the facility failed to ensure residents who are incontinent receive appropriate treatment and services, for one resident left wet for an extended period of time (Resident #37) and one resident observed during personal care (Resident #120). The sample was 35. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. 1. Review of Resident #147's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 11/20/19, showed: -Indwelling catheter used; -Diagnoses included seizure disorder; -Total assistance required for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review 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 · D2020-01-08 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 communicate weight loss and refusal of Juven (nutritional supplement) to the registered dietician (RD) and obtain weights, for one resident (Resident #232). The sample was 35. The census was 216 with 180 in certified beds. Review of the facility's weight policy, revised 1/2018, showed: -Purpose: To obtain accurate weight of each resident and maintain control of weight changes; -Residents are weighed on admission, weekly and monthly thereafter, unless otherwise ordered by nursing from the attending physician; -Facility designee will record weights in the individual resident's electronic medical record (EMR) under vital signs: -Any resident with a weight gain or loss of 5 pounds (lbs.) will be reweighed within 24 hours; -Weight reports will be monitored by the charge nurse, RD/dining services, director of nursing (DON). The weight management committee will meet monthly to discuss residents with fluctuations; -Significant weight loss is defined as loss of 5% or more in 30 days, 7.5% or more in 3 months or 10% or…
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 before2020-01-08 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 followed acceptable standards of practice for one resident with a gastric tube (g-tube, a tube inserted into the stomach to provide food, fluid and nutrition). The facility identified seven residents as having a g-tube, six were included in the sample of 35 and issues were identified with one (Resident #153). The census was 216 with 180 residents in certified beds. Review of the resident's electronic physician order sheet (ePOS), showed an order dated 1/18/19 for Glucerna (liquid nutrition) at 60 milliliters (ml) per hour continuous. Observation on 1/2/20 at 10:42 A.M., showed the resident in bed. Glucerna administered at 60 ml per hour. The Glucerna bottle not labeled with the date and time hung. Further review of the resident's ePOS, showed: -An order dated 12/18/19, for aspirin 81 milligram (mg) chew per g-tube daily; -An order dated 12/27/19, for omeprazole (used to treat heart burn) capsule, 20 mg per g-tube daily; -An order dated 1/1/20, for sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (antibiotic) tablet,…
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 · D2020-01-08 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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 that pain management is provided to residents who require such services for one resident observed to have pain when staff failed to inform the nurse the resident experience pain (Resident #147). The census was 216 with 180 residents certified beds. Review of Resident #147's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 11/20/19, showed: -Diagnoses included seizure disorder; -Total assistance required for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review of the resident's care plan, in use at the time of the survey, showed: -Problem: Need for comfort measures in care due to significant change in condition; -Goal: Remain comfortable physically, emotionally, and spiritually; -Approach: Contact Hospice staff to assist with care suggestions for pain management. Monitor for signs and symptoms of discomfort. Provide medications as ordered to control pain and discomfort. Review of the resident's electronic physician order 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.
“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
$39,299 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $39,299 — penalty dated 2025-02-10
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2023-12-07 for 9 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to DELMAR GARDENS — 12 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 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DELMAR GARDENS ENTERPRISES INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/16/2003 |
| GABE GROSSBERG AND GEORGE GROSSBERG, TRUSTEES OF THE HENRY AND BARBARA | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 04/16/2003 |
| GEORGE GROSSBERG AND GABE GROSSBERG, TRUSTEES OF THE HENRY AND BARBARA | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 04/16/2003 |
| GOLDBERG-NOM LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 04/16/2003 |
| NON-GST FAMILY TRUST EST U/W OF ISRAEL GOLDBERG FBO JANICE BITANSKI | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/10/2013 |
| NON-GST FAMILY TRUST ESTABLISHED U/W OF ISRAEL GOLDBERG FBO HARRY ZVI | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/10/2013 |
| NON-GSTFAMILY TRUST EST U/W ISRAEL GOLDBERG FBO DIANE FREDMAN | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/10/2013 |
| GROSSBERG, GABE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 16% | since 04/16/2003 |
| GROSSBERG, GEORGE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 11% | since 04/16/2003 |
| MARX, KENNETH | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| RODGERS, LYNN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/06/2020 |
| ULRICH, AMBER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/07/2022 |
| OPPENHEIMER, HOWARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/16/2003 |
| DELMAR GARDENS MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2005 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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.
About 77% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 265325. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-17, 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.