Gower Convalescent Center, INC

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

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.

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.

46.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 32 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 9% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 82 beds and averages 69.6 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.70 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.89 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 3.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.27 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 17% 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

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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-05-21 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food safety when the facility staff thawed sausage in the refrigerator on a wire rack shelf above a box of sausage rolls and ground beef, when [NAME] B did not wash hands between glove changes while preparing and serving food, and additionally when [NAME] C sat two frozen chicken strips on a package of hamburger buns that still contained hamburger buns while waiting for the air fryer to heat up. This had the potential to affect all resident's. The facility census was 67.Review of the facilities Storage-Refrigerated Foods policy, not dated, showed: Place meat, poultry and seafood items on the lowest shelf to minimize leakage onto other stored foods. Review of the facilities Glove-ology flyer, not dated, showed:-Washing hands thoroughly before and after wearing or changing gloves was the most important thing to reduce surface bacteria, sweat, dirt and grim build-up on skin and under nails;-Glove use in itself did not guarantee…

  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 · E2026-05-21 · tag F0552 — pattern
  Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform residents and/or their responsible parties, in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care. When the facility failed to obtain written consent before beginning psychotropic medications (medications that affect the mind, emotions, and behavior) for three Residents (Resident #8, Resident #9, and Resident #19) of the 17 sampled residents. The facility census was 67.The facility did not provide a Psychotropic Medications policy. 1. Review of Resident #8's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment completed by facility staff, dated 04/24/26, showed:- Moderate cognitive impairment;- Independent with activities of daily living (ADL's);- Diagnoses: Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, and bipolar disorder (mental health condition characterized by extreme, cyclical shifts in mood, energy, and activity levels). Review of the resident's Comprehensive care plan, dated 04/20/26, showed:- The Resident was at risk for adverse…

  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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-05-21 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  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 implement policies and procedures to ensure resident trust accounts (RTF) were credited with interest monthly for three residents (Resident #33, #49, and #55) and failed to obtain written authorization for the disbursement of funds from the RTF for two residents (Resident #49 and #55). The facility census was 67.Request for facility policy on the Management of the RTF not provided.1. Review of Resident #33's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment, dated 04/01/26, showed: - He/she had severe cognitive impairment;- Diagnoses: non-traumatic brain dysfunction, Alzheimer's disease and anxiety disorder.Review of the Resident's January - March 2026 Quarterly RTF statement, showed:- He/She had a balance of $433.22 on 01/01/26 and a balance of $563.22 on 03/31/26;- Resident did not receive any credits for interest for the quarter;- On 03/31/26 had a charge for $20.00 for a haircut without a signed receipt from the resident or guardian…

  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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-05-21 · tag F0568 — pattern
  Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain a system to ensure the resident trust fund (RTF) account was managed in accordance with proper accounting principles by not maintaining a monthly written reconciliation of all monies held in the resident trust fund account. The facility managed funds for 9 residents. The facility census was 67.Request for facility policy on the Management of the RTF not provided.1. Review of the monthly bank statements from April 2025 through March 2026 did not contain a written record of a reconciliation of the RTF account with the bank statements. During an interview on 05/21/26 at 9:25 A.M., the Business Office Manager (BOM) said:- She reconciles the RTF account monthly but does not record the reconciliation or have paperwork showing the account funds reconcile with the bank statements.During an interview on 05/21/26 at 2:35 P.M., the Administrator said:- There should be a written record of the monthly reconciliation of the RTF account done by the BOM.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide proper respiratory care when staff failed to document the date when oxygen tubing was replaced for four residents (Resident #9, #11, #31, and #44), failed to ensure clean concentrator filters for one resident (Resident #11), and failed to provide proper storage for tubing (Residents #44) resulting in possible exposure to bacteria during oxygen usage and possible adverse effects. This affected four of 17 sampled residents. The facility census was 67. Review of facility Policy for Administration of Medications and Cleaning a Nebulizer Machine, dated as revised on 07/27/2021, showed:- After each treatment - discard any leftover medication;- Rinse the nebulizer medication cup and mouthpiece or mask with warm running water and place on a paper towel to air dry;- When dry, connect to the tubing and run nebulizer machine for 10 to 20 seconds;- Place dry equipment and tubing in a plastic container;- Weekly - replaced used tubing, mask, 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0675 — failed to support quality of life — isolated
  Honor each resident's preferences, choices, values and beliefs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of the 17 sampled residents, (Resident #10) received care which would allow the resident to achieve his/her highest practicable well-being. The facility census was 67. Review of the facility's Resident Rights Policy revised 8/25 showed:-As a resident, you have the right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with access to people and services inside and outside the facility. -The facility must treat you with respect and dignity and care for you in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of your quality of life, while recognizing your individuality. -The right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of your needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger your health or safety or the health or safety of other residents.-You have the right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-17 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect Resident #1's right to be free from abuse when Resident #2 grabbed Resident #1 by the hair and jerked his/her head around. Facility census was 78. Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse and Neglect, dated 9/29/2017, showed: -The residents of the facility have the right to be free from physical abuse. Residents of the facility must not be subjected to abuse or neglect by anyone. It is the responsibility of our employees, facility consultants, attending physicians, family members, visitors, etc., to promptly report any incident or suspected incident of neglect or resident abuse, including injuries of unknown source, and theft or misappropriation of resident property to the facility management team. Our facility will not condone resident abuse by anyone. - If a resident is observed/accused of abusing another resident, our facility will implement the following actions: -Remove the aggressor from the situation of the aggressor is…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-02-21 · 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 failed to store, prepare and serve food in accordance with professional standards of food service safety when staff failed to date the receipt of incoming products in the dry storeroom, label and date used products in the freezer and refrigerator, label, date and dispose of leftovers in the refrigerator, monitor refrigerator and freezer temperatures on a daily basis, and follow sanitation requirements for cleanliness, handwashing and hairnets in the kitchen and dining room. This affected all residents by putting them at risk for a food borne illness. The facility census was 78. Review of facility policy Hair Restraints for Dining Service, revised 10/26/21, showed: - Hair restraints shall be worn by all Dining Services staff when in food production, dishwashing areas or when serving food from the steam table. Hair restraints must be worn in the kitchen at all times; - Hair restraints, hats, and/or beard guards shall be used to prevent hair from…

  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 · E2025-02-21 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assure staff treated residents in a manner that maintained their dignity, when staff did not serve all residents who sat at the same table during meals, which affected any resident who ate in the dining room, and failed to ensure one of the 18 sampled residents, (Resident #47), was free of facial hair. The facility census was 78. Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, revised 8/22, showed staff were directed to do the following: - The resident has a right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility; - A facility must treat each resident with respect and dignity and care of each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his/her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality; - The facility must protect and promote the rights of the resident. 1. Review of Resident #47'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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-02-21 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — pattern
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain the privacy of two of the 18 sampled residents, (Resident #43 and #73), when staff failed to post signage at the front door or outside each sampled resident's room to indicate 24 hour camera surveillance was in progress and failed to obtain consents from the responsible parties of the sampled residents. The facility census was 78. The facility did not provide a policy for video surveillance with or without audio. 1. Review of Resident #73's care plan, dated 9/20/24, did not address the use of video surveillance with audio. Review of the Resident's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, completed by facility staff, dated 11/20/24, showed: - Cognitive skills intact; - Dependent on the assistance of staff for toilet use, and transfers; - Required substantial to maximum assistance with showers, dressing, and personal hygiene; - Had a urinary catheter (sterile tube inserted into the bladder to drain…

  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 Rights 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.

Fines & penalties

$6,351 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $6,351 — penalty dated 2023-10-23

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 8 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.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MO