Crowley Ridge Care Center
1204 North Outer Road, Dexter, MO 63841 · For profit - Individual · 90 certified beds · (573) 624-5557 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- 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
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Jun 2025
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- about 18% 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 | 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 fell from 4 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.1% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.6% | 5.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.3% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 6.5% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.2% | 18.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 7.5% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.9% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 33.3% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 9.2% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 27.7% | 23.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 4.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 37.5% | 63.5% | 79.4% | 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 0.04 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 1% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 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 | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 90 beds and averages 47.5 residents a day — about 53% occupied, or roughly 42 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 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.17 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.62 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.32 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.18 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as 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 before2025-06-10 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 one resident (Resident #1) out of four sampled residents was free of misappropriation of his/her property when Social Services Director (SSD) utilized the resident's banking information for his/her own personal use. The facility census was 50. The administration was notified on 06/10/25 of the Past Non-Compliance which occurred between 06/03/25 through 06/09/25. On 06/03/25, upon notification, the facility administration started an investigation, notified the police department and the Department of Health and Senior Services of the misappropriation. The non-compliance was corrected on 06/09/25, as the facility terminated employment of SSD, in-serviced all staff on the facility's policy and procedures on misappropriation and Resident #1 is to be refunded for the amount misappropriated. Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse Prohibition Protocol Manual, dated May 2006, showed: -Misappropriation of resident property defined as deliberate…
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 · D2025-03-20 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument required to be completed by facility staff) assessment within 14 days of admission of hospice services for one resident (Resident #50) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 48. The facility did not provide a policy regarding the completion of significant change MDS assessments. 1. Review of Resident #50's medical record showed: - admitted to hospice services on 02/26/25; - No significant change MDS dated on or after 02/26/25; - The facility failed to complete a significant change MDS within 14 days of the resident's admission to hospice. During an interview on 03/20/25 at 10:00 A.M., the MDS Coordinator said he/she would expect a significant change MDS to be completed if a resident was admitted to hospice. He/She would expect the MDS to reflect the resident's current condition. During an interview on 03/20/25 at 12:00 P.M., the Administrator said she would expect the MDS to reflect the resident's current…
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 · D2025-03-20 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
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 identify, assess, and provide supportive interventions for one resident (Resident #47) with a diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD - a mental health condition triggered by a terrifying event - either experiencing it or witnessing it; symptoms may include flashbacks, nightmares and severe anxiety, as well as uncontrollable thoughts about the event) out of one sampled residents The facility's census was 48. The facility did not provide a policy regarding trauma informed care. 1. Review of Resident #47's medical record showed: - admission date of 11/01/24; - Diagnoses of PTSD, major depressive disorder (a mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities, causing significant impairment in daily life), panic disorder (a long-term anxiety disorder that involved repeated and unexpected panic attacks), generalized anxiety disorder (persistent feeling of worry), unspecified dementia (a condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an error rate of less than five percent (%) during medication administration. There were 38 opportunities with three errors made, for an error rate of 7.89%, which affected three residents (Residents #37, #38, and #39) out of seven sampled residents. The facility census was 48. The facility did not have a policy for insulin administration. Review of the insulin aspart (medication to lower blood sugar), Novolog (medication to lower blood sugar) insulin, and insulin lispro (medication to lower blood sugar) Pen's Manufacture Guidelines for Priming Before Each Injection and Administration, revised 02/2023, showed: - Turn the dose selector to select two units; - Hold the pen with the needle pointing up; - Tap the cartridge gently with your finger a few times to make any air bubbles collect at the top of the cartridge; - Keep the needle pointing upwards, press the push-button all the way in; - The dose selector returns to zero; - A drop of insulin should appear at the needle tip. If not, change the needle…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-10 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 prevent the misappropriation of four resident's (Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4) narcotic medication. The facility census was 46. The administrator was notified on 02/03/25 of the Past Non-Compliance which occurred on 01/28/25. On 01/28/25, facility staff started an investigation, completed disciplinary action and began in-servicing all involved licensed nurses on the narcotic count and documentation policies and procedures. Facility staff also notified Department of Health and Senior Services on 01/28/25 and local law enforcement on 01/28/25. The noncompliance was corrected 01/31/25. Review of the facility's Medication Administration Guidelines, undated, showed: - Residents receive their medications on a timely basis and in accordance with established policies; - Drug administration shall be defined as an act in which an authorized person, in accordance with all laws and regulations governing such acts, gives a single dose of a prescribed drug or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-04-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. This has the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 43. Review of the facility's policy titled, Storage of Dry Food and Supplies, dated April 2011, showed: - The Dietary Department will store dry food and supplies according to facility guidelines and state regulations; - The storeroom must be neat and orderly; - Open boxes are to be effectively resealed. Bulk crackers, cereal, cookies, pasta, are to be stored and properly labeled in sealed containers; - Severely dented, rusted, leaking, and bulging cans must be placed in a separate, labeled holding area for return to the distributor. Observation on 04/03/24 at 10:34 A.M., of the dry food storage room showed: - Three 12 quart (qt.) plastic containers containing dry cereals without an item label or date; - One 12 qt. plastic container containing salt without a date; - One 5 gallon plastic container containing sugar without 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 · D2024-04-05 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (Resident #8, and #16) received a Level II Preadmission Screening and Record Review (a comprehensive evaluation required as a result of a positive Level I screening and to determine whether placement or continued stay in a nursing facility to be appropriate) (PASARR) out of four sampled residents. The facility census was 43. The facility did not provide a policy. 1. Record review of Resident #8's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a federally mandated assessment to be completed by the facility staff), dated 01/22/24, showed: - admitted to the facility on [DATE]; - Diagnoses of neurogenic bladder (lack of bladder control due to brain, spinal cord or nerve problems), cerebral vascular accident (CVA, an interruption in the flow of blood to the brain), paraplegia (paralysis of the legs and lower body), anxiety disorder (disorder characterized by feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that are strong enough to interfere with one's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow standard precautions to prevent the spread of infection. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 43. Review of facility policy titled, Medications, Storage of from the Nursing Guidelines Manual states: - Drugs must be stored in an orderly manner in cabinets, drawers, or carts. - Each resident must have a space assigned to them that prevents the possibility of a drug for one resident being administered to another. Review of facility policy titles, Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 10/13/22 states: - Medical staff supports the infection prevention/control program by adhering to all policies and procedures related to infection prevention. - Employees support resident safety by adhering to all guidelines related to infection prevention. Observation on 04/05/24 at 9:00 A.M., showed Certified Medication Technician (CMT) A's personal travel cup with clear lid and straw full of cream-colored liquid sitting in drawer of the medication cart along with stock medications…
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 · D2024-04-05 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the required annual competencies of Abuse Prevention and Dementia Care for two out of two nurse aides sampled. The facility census was 43. The facility did not provide a policy regarding Abuse Prevention and Dementia Care training. 1. Review of the facility's April 2023 through March 2024 in-service records showed: - Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) C with a hire date of 04/26/14; - CNA C attended a total of 16.5 hours of in-services; - CNA C did not attend an annual competency in-service on Abuse Prevention; - CNA C did not attend an annual competency in-service on Dementia Care. 2. Review of the facility's April 2023 through March 2024 in-service records showed: - CNA D with a hire date of 01/20/22; - CNA D attended a total of 12 hours of in-services; - CNA D did not attend an annual competency in-service on Abuse Prevention; - CNA D did not attend an annual competency in-service on Dementia Care. During an interview on 04/05/24 at 2:00 P.M., the Administrator said that annual nurse aide training should include…
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 · F2022-11-04 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in 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 ensure at least one person had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control for the Infection Preventionist (IP), a professional who assures healthcare workers and residents are doing everything possible to prevent infection, position. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 41. The facility did not provide records indicating any staff member had been enrolled in the specialized training for the IP position. During an interview at 11/03/22 at 1:21 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she had been keeping track of the antibiotic stewardship and would be signing up for the IP class that day. During an interview on 11/04/22 at 12:52 P.M., the Administrator said the DON and Registered Nurse (RN) D both shared the responsibility of the IP. They were both in the process of signing up for the training and she would expect the IP(s) to have had the training required. Record review of the facility's policy for the Infection Prevention and Control Program,…
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 · D2022-11-04 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for oxygen (O2) use for one resident (Resident #138 ) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 41. Record review of the facility's Physician's Orders policy, dated April 2006, showed: - Oxygen orders must specify the rate of flow, route and rationale. 1. Record review of Resident #138's medical record showed: - An admission date of 10/28/22; - Diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), (a group of diseases that cause airflow blockage and breathing related problems), major depressive disorder (MDD) (a mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities, causing significant impairment in daily life), and anxiety disorder (a disorder characterized by feelings of worry, anxiety or fear that is strong enough to interfere with one's daily activities). Record review of the resident's November 2022 Physician's Order Sheet (POS) showed: - No order for oxygen use. Observations of the resident showed: - On 11/1/22 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 JAMES & JUDY LINCOLN — 56 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 | 2.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 2.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 55 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 55; lowest-rated first.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N & R OF DEXTER INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/1999 |
| LINCOLN, JAMES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 01/01/1999 |
| LINCOLN, JUDY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 01/01/1999 |
| HENSLEY, KRISTI | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 04/25/2022 |
| BYSOR, BRANDON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/25/2022 |
| DRAKE, TIMOTHY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/1999 |
| STUTTS, CHARLOTTE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/1999 |
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.
About 76% 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 $789K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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 265552. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-20, 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.