No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Lenoir Health Care Center

3850 Cartwright Lane, Columbia, MO 65201 · Non profit - Corporation · 56 certified beds · (573) 876-5800 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (573) 876-5800 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Feb 2023Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0740)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • 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
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3710 S Lenoir St · (573) 815-6359 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2909 Falling Leaf Ln · (573) 545-5278 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
ALDI1.6 mi
 
Park
(573) 874-7465 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased27.0%18.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.7%5.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.3%1.1%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.8%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%18.5%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.6%4.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened23.7%17.4%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.1%25.6%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%90.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.9%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control26.6%17.8%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table19.2%23.5%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.5%63.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission13.5%26.0%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit0.0%13.7%12.0%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.782.111.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.022.331.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

64.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 66 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

64.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
84.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

Met the expected recovery: 84.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 26 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF64.9%CMS range 53.5–75.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.3–13.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge84.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge84.6%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge57.7%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.0%CMS range 3.4–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.481.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.57
RN hours/ resident / day
1.08
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.23
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.88
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.41
RN hoursweekends
34.8%
Total nursing turnover
36.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 56 beds and averages 49.3 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.88 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.23 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 4.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.98 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.64 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-10)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-08)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility staff failed to store food in a manner to prevent potential contamination, out-dated use and reuse of single-service containers. This failure had the potential to affect residents who dined in the Woods Central and Olive [NAME] units and residents who received modified textured diets. The facility census was 48. 1. Review of the facility's Food Storage Policy, revised 10/01/20, showed: -Inspect food regularly for damage due to spoilage; -Items that arrive in their original packaging with a manufacturer's expiration date will utilize that date for discard: a. Should an item be opened and stored in a different container, it will be labeled with an open date and discard date; -Food safety practices based on ServSafe Standards will be followed at all times. Review of the ServSafe Manager's Manual, 7th edition, Chapter 5 (The Flow of Food: Purchasing, Receiving, and Storage) showed: -Following good storage guidelines for food and nonfood items will help keep these items safe and preserve their quality. In general, you must…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide 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, facility staff failed to use enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) (an infection control practice that requires staff to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) for five residents (Resident #15, #25, #27, #40, and #14) of five sampled residents who required care. The facility census was 48. 1. Review of the facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 02/25/25, showed EBP are utilized to prevent the spread of multi-drug resistant organisms (MDRO)s (bacteria or fungi that have developed resistance to one or more classes of antimicrobial agents, making them difficult to treat) to residents. EBPs employ targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities when contact precautions do not otherwise apply. Gloves and gown are applied prior to performing the high contact resident care activity (as opposed to before entering the room) for residents that have a wound or indwelling medical device, and secretions or excretions that 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide 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, facility staff failed to use appropriate infection control procedures to prevent the spread of bacteria or other infectious causing contaminants when staff failed to perform appropriate hand hygiene and glove changes during incontinent care for three residents (Resident #32, #35, and #36), and failed to properly handle soiled linens for one resident (Resident #36). The facility census was 49. 1. Review of the facility's Hand Hygiene policy, reviewed 01/30/24, showed all personnel shall follow the handwashing/hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infection to other personnel, residents, and visitors. Review showed: -Use an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 60% alcohol, or, alternatively soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial) and water for the following situations: a. Before and after contact with residents; b. Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care; c. After removing gloves; -The use 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure 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, resident and staff interview, and record review, facility staff failed to provide safe mechanical lift transfers for four (Resident #28, #29, #32, and #35) out of 13 sampled residents. Facility staff failed to provide safe medication storage for three residents (Resident #23, #36, and #8). The facility census was 49. 1. Review of the facility's Safe Lifting and Movement of Residents policy, dated 10/14/19, showed staff were directed as follows: -Staff responsible for direct resident care will be trained in the use of a mechanical lifting devices; -Staff will be observed for competency in using mechanical lifts and observed periodically for adherence to policies and procedures regarding the use of equipment and safe lifting techniques. Review of the mechanical lift manufacturer's manual, dated 10/01/18, showed a warming, the legs of the lift must be in the maximum open position for optimum stability and safety. If it is necessary to close the legs of the lift to maneuver the lift under 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-08 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure 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 interviews and record review, staff failed to maintain a professional standard of care when staff failed to ensure one resident's (Resident #36) care plan for advanced directives (code status - decision to start or withhold Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - CPR) matched the physician ordered advanced directive and failed to notify the physician for further direction when an ordered supplement was unavailable. The facility census was 49. 1. Review of the facility's Advanced Directives policy, reviewed [DATE], showed: -Prior to admission or upon admission of a resident, the Social Service Director (SSD) or designee will inquire of the resident and their representative about the existence of any written advanced directive; -Information about whether or not the resident has executed an advanced directive shall be displayed in the ribbon in the Electronic Health Record (EHR); -The plan of care for each resident will be consistent with their documented treatment preferences and/or advanced directives; -A nurse…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-08 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews and record review, facility staff failed to review, revise and develop individualized interventions for one resident (Resident #5) who exhibited behaviors. The facility census was 49. 1. Review of the Facility Assessment, dated July 2023 through June 2024, showed: -Twenty-eight residents with a diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease (A progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions); -Twenty-one residents with a diagnosis of unspecified dementia (A group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning). Review of the facility's Mood and Behavior policy, undated, showed: -To provide a plan of care that is individualized to the resident's needs based on the comprehensive assessment by the interdisciplinary team; -An initial care plan identifying resident mood and behavior needs will be completed and communicated to care givers; -Any mood and behavior symptoms will be documented by the Interdisciplinary Team while caring for the resident, as well as interventions attempted and outcome; -The community will…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-02-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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, interview, and record review, the facility staff failed to properly store open food to prevent cross-contamination and outdated usage, to maintain kitchen equipment in a clean and sanitary manner, and to perform hand hygiene and change gloves as often as necessary to prevent cross contamination. This failure had the potential to affect all facility occupants. The census was 32. 1. Review of the facility's Food Storage and Safety Policies, dated 9/10/19, showed staff are directed to contain, store, label, and date everything properly. Observation on 2/1/23 at 12:20 P.M. in the Reach kitchen, showed a refrigerator contained: - Four uncovered cups of orange liquid not labeled, four uncovered cups of brown liquid not labeled, and four uncovered cups of clear liquid not labeled; - Multiple small bowls of citrus slices undated and not labeled; - One container of sliced white circles undated and not labeled. Observation on 2/1/23 at 12:25 P.M. in the Reach kitchen, showed the one opened container…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-06 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to check the Certified Nurses' Assistant (CNA) Registry before hire for all staff in accordance with their policy to ensure they did not have a Federal Indicator (a marker given by the federal government to individuals who have committed abuse/neglect) for three employees (Housekeeper J, Dining Service K and Security L) out of ten sampled employees hired since the last survey. The census was 32. 1. Review of the Pre-Employment Screening Procedures Policy, Revised 3/6/20, showed the following: Background check -Concurrent to the candidate completing the pre-employment testing, the HR Representative will run all required background checks. The HR Representative will log into the background check vendor's site to order the appropriate background check. This includes: -Missouri Nurse Aide Registry (CNA). 2. Review of House Keeper J's employee file, showed the following: -Hire date of 6/20/22; -Staff did not document a CNA registry check was completed. 3. Review of Dining Services K's employee file, showed the following: -Hire…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-02-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
    Ensure 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, facility staff failed to maintain professional standards of practice by not completing neurological assessments (evaluation completed by staff for early detection of nervous system damage following head trauma) following unwitnessed falls, and falls with a known head injury, for five residents (Resident #6, #16, #20, #23, and #25). The facility census was 32. 1. Review of the facility's Fall and Fall Risk, Managing policy, dated September 2022, showed staff are directed as follows: -A fall without injury is still a fall; -Unless there is evidence suggesting otherwise, when a resident is found on the floor, a fall is considered to have occurred; -The staff, with the input of the attending physician, will implement a resident-centered fall prevention plan to reduce the specific risk factor(s) of falls for each resident at risk or with a history of falls; -If falling recurs despite initial interventions, staff will implement additional or different interventions,…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-02-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure 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, facility staff failed to propel residents in wheelchairs in a manner to prevent accidents by failing to use foot rests, for four residents (Residents #4, #7, #17, and #24). The facility census was 32. 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Assistive Equipment Devices, dated 10/01/18, showed the community provides, maintains, trains, and supervises the use of assistive devices and equipment for residents. The policy shows staff will be trained and will demonstrate competency on the use of devices and equipment prior to assisting or supervising residents. Residents, family, and visitors will be trained, as indicated, on the safe use of equipment and devices. The Assistive Equipment Device policy does not address the use of foot pedals when propelling a resident in a wheelchair. 2. Review of Resident #4's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 1/23/23, showed the following: -Required…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-06 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review facility staff failed to assess for risk of entrapment upon initiation and/or quarterly, and/or obtain informed consent for bed rails for two residents (Resident #23 and #288). The facility census was 32. 1. Review of the facility's Proper Use of Bed Assistive Devices policy, revised 9/16/22, showed: -An assessment will be made to determine the resident's symptoms or reason for using the bed assistive device upon initiation, quarterly, and as needed; -The use of bed assistive devices will be addressed in the resident's care plan; -Consent for using bed assistive devices will be obtained from the resident or resident representative and documented by community protocol; -When a bed assistive device is appropriate, the community should assess the resident's risk for entrapment, and ensure the bed's dimensions are appropriate for the resident's size and weight upon initiation, quarterly, and as needed. 2. Review of Resident #23's significant change Minimum Data Set…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2023-02-06 · tag F0888 — widespread
    Ensure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility staff failed to ensure 100% of staff were fully vaccinated for COVID-19 (a highly contagious virus that causes serious illness or death). One employee, (Registered Nurse (RN) F), of eight employees sampled, had a medical exemption form that did not include an exemption recognized by the CDC. The facility Census was 32. 1. Review of the facility's COVID-19 Vaccination Policy, revised 8/17/22 showed: To protect residents, guests, clients, employees, family members and the community from Sars-Cov-2 (COVID-19) infection, all employees as well as regularly scheduled contracted personnel (e.g. rehab therapy staff) must be fully immunized against COVID-19. For purposes of this policy, fully immunized means all doses in the primary series and all recommended booster doses, when eligible, as required by law. Exemptions to the COVID-19 immunization requirement will be granted as an accommodation for medical reasons or sincerely held religious beliefs only, as outlined below. Exemptions to the COVID-19 vaccination requirement will be granted…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2023-02-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to provide appropriate personal hygiene care for six dependent residents (Resident #5, #6, #10, #17, #25, and #30). The facility census was 32. 1. Review of the facility's policies showed the staff did not provide a bath (shower) policy. 2. Review of Resident #5's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 11/19/22, showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Required extensive assistance of one staff member for bed mobility, dressing, and personal hygiene; -Required extensive assistance of two staff members for transfers and toileting; -Totally dependent on staff for bathing; -Diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (a progressive mental deterioration that can occur in middle or old age, due to generalized degeneration of the brain) and polyosteoarthritis (Inflammation of five or more joints, causing pain and stiffness). Review of the resident's care plan, reviewed on 11/19/23, showed the care plan did not…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to EVERTRUE — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
LUTHERAN SENIOR SERVICESOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL100%since 03/15/2010
BEUMER, BRENTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/27/2022
CHRISTELL, ROYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/25/2017
MEADOWS, MEGANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/24/2022
MUELLER, HARRYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/26/2016
SOMBART, LISAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/25/2017
SOMMER, CHRISTOPHERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2023
TOON, NORMANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2019
ANDERSON, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2019
BROWN, DANIELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/25/2018
MARLES, ADAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/01/2021
SCHAEFER, RONALDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/06/2023
SNEED, CHADWICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2020
TICE, PAULIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/25/2017
COOPER, VALERIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/17/2009
LIN, WALTERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

$8.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.6M
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 17%Medicare 3%Other / private 79%

This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$1,153per resident / day
operating cost
$35,056per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$354per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Missouri
$6,741/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,400/mo
Assisted living

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 265639. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-10, 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.

What to do next