Heartland Care And Rehabilitation Center
2525 Boutin Drive, Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 · For profit - Individual · 102 certified beds · (573) 334-5225 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (66%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 26% 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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 5 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 | 7.0% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.8% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.5% | 18.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.8% | 0.0% | 0.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.9% | 4.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.0% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.6% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.7% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.6% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.2% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.4% | 23.5% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 59.1% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.6% | 26.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 19.4% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.06 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.28 | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 102 beds and averages 70.6 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 31 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.35 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 is below 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 2.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.25 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.39 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 66% is well above the national median of 45%.
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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-17 · 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 clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 63.Review of the facility's policy titled, Maintenance Service, dated December 2009, showed: - The maintenance department is responsible for maintaining the building, grounds, and equipment in a safe and operable manner at all times; - Functions of maintenance personnel include maintaining the building in good repair and free from hazards; - The maintenance director is responsible for developing and maintaining a schedule of maintenance service to assure that the buildings, grounds, and equipment are maintained in a safe and operable manner. Observation on 09/30/25 at 11:24 A.M., of room [ROOM NUMBER] showed: - The bathroom door could not be opened. During an interview on 10/01/25 at 10:17 A.M., the resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] said he/she could not open the bathroom door, 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 · D2025-11-17 · 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 maintain proper infection control practices when providing catheter (a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) care for two residents (Residents #7 and #59) out of two sampled residents and blood sugar checks for two residents (Residents #16 and #27) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 63.Review of the facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), dated 2024, showed: - EBP refers to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistance organisms (MDROs) that employs targeted gown, and gloves use during high contact resident care activities; - High contact resident care activities include dressing, bathing, transferring, providing hygiene, changing linens, changing briefs or assisting with toileting, wound care, and care of central lines, urinary catheters, feeding tubes, and tracheostomy/ventilator tubes. Review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care, Urinary, dated August 2022, showed: - Use a washcloth with warm…
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 · D2024-10-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 follow physician's orders for four residents (Residents #5, #9, #19, and #68) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility's census was 74. The facility did not provide a policy regarding following physician's orders. 1. Review of Resident #5's medical record showed: - admitted on [DATE]; - Diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD - a debilitating, progressive lung disease), respiratory failure (insufficient oxygen carried to the blood), pneumonia (infection in the lungs), major depressive disorder (low mood), and heart failure (heart does not pump correctly). Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated October 2024, showed an order for daily weights, contact the healthcare provider if a gain of 2 to 3 pounds a day or 5 pounds a week for heart failure (CHF), dated 09/28/24. Review of the resident's weights summary, dated September 2024-October 2024, showed no documentation of weights for 09/28/24-10/01/24,…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 physician's orders for oxygen with the use of a bilevel positive airway pressure (BIPAP - a noninvasive ventilation device that helps people breathe by delivering pressurized air into the airways) was followed for two residents (Residents #5 and #75) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 74. Review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Administration, revised October 2010, showed: - Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure; - Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration; - Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident; - Assemble the equipment and supplies as needed. 1. Review of Resident #5's medical record showed: - admission date of 02/25/05; - Diagnoses of acute and chronic respiratory failure, pneumonia (infection in lungs which can make it harder to breathe), heart failure (heart not pumping as it should), chronic…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 (%) when medications were administered. There were 28 opportunities with three errors made, for an error rate of 11% which affected one resident (Resident #8) outside the sample of four residents. The facility census was 74. Review of the facility's policy titled, Insulin Administration, dated 2001, showed: - Only appropriately licensed or certified personnel shall draw and administer insulin; - The type of insulin, dosage requirements, strength, and method of administration must be verified before administration, to assure that it corresponds with the order on the medication sheet and the physician's order; - The nursing staff will have access to specific instructions (from the manufacturer if appropriate) on all forms of insulin delivery system(s) prior to their use. Review of the insulin glargine manufacture guidelines for administration, revised 11/2018, showed: - To prime an insulin pen, follow these steps: turn the dosage selector to select a dose of two…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 drugs and biologicals were labeled in accordance with currently accepted practices. The facility also failed to ensure one resident (Resident #22) outside of the 20 sampled residents had a physician's order to keep medications at the bedside. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 74. The facility did not provide a policy regarding residents keeping at the bedside/self-administering medications. Review of the facility policy titled Medication Labeling and Storage, revised February 2023, showed: - Compartments (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes) containing medications and biologicals are locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items are not left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others. 1. Review of Resident #20's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated October 2024, showed: - An order for Muro (used to reduce swelling of the cornea) 128 ophthalmic solution instill one drop…
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 before2023-06-08 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 and comfortable homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 76. Review of the facility policy titled, Maintenance Service, revised 2009, showed: - Maintenance service shall be provided to all areas of the building, grounds, and equipment; - The Maintenance Department is responsible for maintaining the buildings, grounds, and equipment in a safe and operable manner at all times; - The Maintenance Director is responsible for maintaining inspections of the buildings and work order requests; - Records shall be maintained in the Maintenance Director's office. Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Rights, undated, showed: - Resident has the right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment; - Facility must provide housekeeping and maintenance services to maintain a sanitary, orderly and comfortable interior; - 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 · D2023-06-08 · 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 accurately and consistently documented throughout the medical record for one resident (Resident #66) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 76. Review of the facility policy titled, Do Not Resuscitate Order, revised [DATE], showed: - The facility will not use cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (an emergency procedure consisting of chest compressions if the heart stops beating or the person stops breathing) and related emergency measures to maintain life functions on a resident when there is a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) (does not want cardiopulmonary resuscitation) Order in effect; - A DNR order form must be completed and signed by the attending physician and the resident or the resident's legal surrogate and placed in the front of the resident's medical record; - 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…
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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake 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. The facility census was 76. Review of the facility policy titled, Pest Control, revised 2008, showed: - The facility shall maintain an effective pest control program; - The facility maintains an on-going pest control program to ensure that the building is kept free of insects and rodents; - Pest control services are provided by a contract company; - Maintenance services assist, when appropriate and necessary, in providing pest control services. 1. Observation on 06/05/23 at 11:08 A.M., of the secure unit showed: - Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) F swatted at flies with a fly swatter in the hallway and in the dining room; - Several flies buzzed throughout the dining room and crawled on the dining room tables, walls and windows. Observations on 06/05/23 at 12:26 P.M., of the secure unit lunch meal showed: - Several flies buzzed throughout the dining room 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.
- No harm found · C2024-10-25 · tag F0568 — widespreadProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
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 a system to ensure the resident trust fund account was managed in accordance with proper accounting principles by not maintaining an accurate accounting of all monies held in the resident trust fund petty cash box. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 74. Review of the facility policy titled, Management of Residents' Personal Funds, revised March 2021, showed: - The facility manages the personal funds of residents who request the facility to do so; - Should the facility manage the resident's funds, the facility acts as a fiduciary of the resident funds and holds, safeguards, manages and accounts for the personal funds of the resident. No service charge is levied against the resident for the management of personal funds; - Should the facility be appointed the resident's representative payee, and directly receive monthly benefits to which the resident is entitled, such funds are managed in accordance with established policies and federal/state requirements.…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-06-08 · tag F0660 — widespreadPlan 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 #80) out of two sampled discharged residents. The facility census was 76. The facility did not provide a policy for discharge planning. 1. Review of Resident #80's closed medical record showed: - admission date of 12/01/21; - Diagnoses of hypertension (HTN) (high blood pressure), anxiety disorder (persistent worry and fear about everyday situations), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (an inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs) and insomnia (difficulty sleeping); - Family member as legal guardian; - No documentation that addressed the resident's preference and potential for a future discharge; - No documentation…
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 CIRCLE B ENTERPRISES — 36 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 | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 3.1 | +1.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
The other 35 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIRCLE B ENTERPRISES HOLDING COMPANY INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/02/1996 |
| BEDELL, DONALD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/06/1997 |
| BEAIRD, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2022 |
| AGH1 LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| SOVEREIGN HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/06/2025 |
| BOLLINGER, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/17/2019 |
| PALEN, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2017 |
| BEDELL, BRYAN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/12/2025 |
| CAPE PROPERTIES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2010 |
| DCB REAL ESTATE PARTNERSHIP LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2010 |
| FG LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/02/2016 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/16/2021 |
| MID STATES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2010 |
| VAN DE VEN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2000 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
9 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 92% 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 $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 26% 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 265503. 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.