Greenville Health Care Center
117 Sycamore Street, Greenville, MO 63944 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (573) 224-3298 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2025
- a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (64%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 23% 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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 5 to 3 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 | 34.1% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.6% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 74.3% | 18.5% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 1.8% | 4.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.7% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 49.5% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.3% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.3% | 4.5% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 9.1% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 58.3% | 23.5% | 17.1% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.4% | 26.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 20.0% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.50 | 2.11 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.64 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 28% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 57.0 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 1.90 on weekdays — about the same on weekends as weekdays. RN hours go from 0.17 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to keep one resident (Resident #1) free from sexual abuse when another resident (Resident #2) intentionally grabbed and squeezed Resident #1's breast twice. The incident upset Resident #1 and the interventions put into place to prevent the incident from happening again caused Resident #1 to feel punished. The facility census was 58. Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse and Neglect, dated 06/10/24, showed:Abuse is the willful infliction of injury, reasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish, which can include staff to resident abuse and certain resident to resident altercations;Sexual abuse is non-consensual contact of any type with a resident. Sexual abuse includes, but is not limited to, the following: unwanted intimate touching of any kind especially of breasts or perineal area;Prevention will also include assessment care planning and monitoring of residents with needs or behaviors…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-03-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during urinary catheter (a flexible tube placed in the body to drain and collect urine) care for two residents (Residents #2 and #56) out of two sampled residents. The facility failed to put interventions in place to ensure the facility's Legionella (a type of bacteria that can cause serious lung infection) testing was completed in a timely manner. The facility census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, last reviewed 05/18/24, showed: - EBP of gown and gloves must be used for high-contact resident care activities for residents with any of the following: infection or colonization with a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CDC)-targeted multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) when contact precautions do not otherwise apply; or wounds and/or indwelling medical devices even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO; - High-contact…
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 · D2025-03-21 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for one resident (Resident #20) out of 15 sampled residents and one resident (Resident #25) outside the sample. The facility's census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Transcription of Orders/Following Physician's Orders, last reviewed May 2024, showed: -The purpose of this policy is to outline procedures in accurately transcribing physician's orders and to ensure that all physicians' orders are followed. To ensure a process is in place to monitor nurses in accurately transcribing and following physician's orders; - Upon receiving a physician's order via telephone, fax, written order, verbal order, transcribed order or other, it will be documented in residents' electronic medical records in orders section; - The Nurse or Certified Medication Technician (CMT) in charge of medication administration must review all their designated Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) prior to the end of their shift to ensure that all medications/treatments…
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 before2025-03-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide protective oversight when facility staff left the medication carts unattended and unlocked on three separate occasions. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage Policy, last reviewed May 2024, showed: - It is the policy of this facility to ensure all medications housed on our premises will be stored in the medication rooms according to the manufacturer's recommendations and sufficient to ensure proper sanitation, temperature, light, ventilation, moisture control, segregation, and security; - All drugs and biologicals will be stored in locked compartments (i.e. medication carts, cabinets, drawers, refrigerators, medication rooms) under proper temperature controls; - Only authorized personnel will have access to the keys to locked compartments; - During a medication pass, medications must be under the direct observation of the person administering medications or locked in the medication storage…
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 · D2025-03-21 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide documentation of ongoing assessments, monitoring, and communication between the facility and the dialysis (a process for removing waste and excess water from the blood) center for one resident (Resident #51) out of one sampled resident. The facility census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Dialysis, revised 03/18/22, showed: - Ensure that residents who require dialysis and such services as ordered by the physician; - The facility will ensure that residents who require dialysis receive such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences; - The facility will ensure that each resident receives care and services for the provision of hemodialysis (a procedure that acts as an artificial kidney, filtering blood to remove waste and excess fluid when the kidneys cannot) and/or peritoneal (lining of the the stomach) dialysis consistent with…
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 · D2025-03-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff reconciled narcotics (a process that allows one staff to reconcile the exact narcotic inventory on hand with another staff) at each shift change for three out of three sampled medication carts. This practice had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Controlled Substance Administration and Accountability Policy, last reviewed 05/14/24, showed: - The charge nurse or other designee conducts a daily visual audit of the required documentation of controlled substances. Spot checks are performed to verify; - Inventory verification: for areas without automated dispensing systems, two licensed nurses account for all controlled substances and access keys at the end of each shift. 1. Review of the 100/200/400 Hall Medication Cart Narcotic Count Log for Controlled Substances showed: - For day/evening/night shifts for 12/27/24 - 01/17/25, 57 missed out of 88 opportunities to reconcile the narcotic counts; - For day/evening/night shifts for 01/18/25 -…
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 · D2025-03-21 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 that as needed (PRN) orders for antipsychotic (medications that treat psychotic disorders) medications were limited to 14 days for one resident (Resident #46) of five sampled residents. The facility census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Use of Psychotropic (medications that affect the mind, emotions, and behavior) Medication Policy, dated 06/26/24, showed: - PRN orders for all psychotropic medications shall be used only when the medication is necessary to treat a diagnosed specific condition that is documented in the clinical record and for a limited duration (14 days); - If the attending physician or prescribing practitioner believes that it is appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond the 14 days, he/she shall document their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order. 1. Review of Resident #46's medical record showed: - A diagnosis of anxiety (an intense, excessive, and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations); - An order for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-21 · 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 a medication error rate of less than five percent (%). There were 38 opportunities with five errors made, resulting in an error rate of 13.15% for two residents (Residents #20 and #25) out of four sampled residents. The facility's census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Administration of Insulin Policy, last reviewed May 2024, showed: - It is the policy of this facility to provide timely administration of insulin in order to meet the needs of each resident and to prevent adverse effects on a resident's condition; - All insulin will be administered in accordance with physician's orders; - Insulin administration will be coordinated with mealtimes and bedtime snacks unless otherwise specified in the physician order; - Monitor blood sugar as ordered by the physician. Review of the facility's policy titled, Blood Glucose Monitoring Policy, last reviewed June 2024, showed: - It is the policy of this facility to perform blood glucose monitoring to diabetic residents as per physician's orders.…
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 · D2025-03-21 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that two residents (Residents #20 and #25) out of two sampled residents were free from significant medication errors when staff did not check blood sugars prior to administering insulin (a medication that regulates blood sugar levels). The facility's census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Administration of Insulin Policy, last reviewed May 2024, showed: - It is the policy of this facility to provide timely administration of insulin in order to meet the needs of each resident and to prevent adverse effects on a resident's condition; - All insulin will be administered in accordance with physician's orders; - Insulin administration will be coordinated with mealtimes and bedtime snacks unless otherwise specified in the physician order; - Monitor blood sugar as ordered by the physician. Review of the facility's policy titled, Blood Glucose Monitoring Policy, last reviewed June 2024, showed: - It is the policy of this facility to perform blood glucose monitoring to diabetic residents as per…
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 · D2024-02-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean and comfortable homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 51. Review of the facility's policy titled, Work Order Policy, dated, 12/21/2022 showed: - To provide an orderly means of communication between the facilities maintenance department and the facilities residents, visitors and staff to report and track needed maintenance work; - Work order forms should be submitted for any issues that an employee observes which need the attention of the Facility Maintenance; - Work order forms are located at front receptionist desk or nurses station; - All employees may submit a work order form by either calling the receptionist/nurse station or by stopping by either desk to fill out a work order form; - The maintenance department will check work orders upon arrival and then approximately every 2 hours throughout the day. Observations made on 02/26/24 at 9:38 A.M. of the 400 hall shower room showed: - Two, three…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 8 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-08-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain infection control practices for eight sampled residents (Residents #11, #24, #34, #36, #38, #48, #50, and #56) out of 14 sampled residents and two residents outside of the sample (Residents #13 and #33) when facility staff failed to clean/disinfect the glucometer (a device used to measure and display the amount of sugar in a person's blood) between each resident use, and failed to perform hand hygiene in between each resident during blood glucose monitoring and medication administration. The facility's census was 53. Record review of the facility's Handwashing policy, revised 12/10/21, showed: - Appropriate 10 to 15 second handwashing must be performed before preparing or handling medications, after handling items potentially contaminated with a resident's blood, body fluids, excretions and secretions, and after removing gloves; - As an adjunct to routine handwashing, an antiseptic solution may be applied to the hands after proper handwashing. Record review of the facility's Blood Glucose Monitoring…
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 · D2022-08-31 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for a code status (the type of treatment a person would or would not receive if their heart or breathing were to stop) for two residents (Resident #42 and #49) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 53. Record review of the facility's Advance Directive (a written statement of a person's wishes regarding medical treatment) policy, dated [DATE], showed: - Individuals with the right to make decisions concerning their care, including the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment, and the right to formulate advance directives as permitted under state statutory and case law; - At the time of admission, as a resident of the facility, the resident will be provided with written information concerning the resident's rights under the state law, both statutory and case law, to make decisions concerning such medical care, including the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment and the right 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-08-31 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 develop, implement and follow an individualized comprehensive care plan with specific interventions for three residents (Resident #24, #38, and #56) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility's census was 53. Record review of the facility's Comprehensive Care Plans and Baseline Care Plans policy, revised 1/19/22, showed: - The Comprehensive Care Plan must be completed within 14 days of admission; - Daily nursing meetings will occur Monday through Friday with a review of the resident's medical, functional, and psychosocial problems. From this meeting, information will be individualized to the resident's plan of care. On Monday morning, the resident's status will be reviewed from the weekend to ensure all areas that need to be assessed for care plan needs will be addressed; - During each meeting, the care plan team will meet and address changes in the resident's plan of care within 24 hours during the week and within 72 hours after the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-08-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were transferred with safe transfer techniques for two residents (Residents #38, and #56) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 53. Record review of the facility's Resident Transfer With a Gait Belt policy, dated 4/9/21, showed: - Apply the gait belt around the waist over clothing with the buckle in front; - Be sure the belt sits snug with just enough room to get your fingers under it; - Place hands underneath the gait belt and instruct the resident to stand on the count of three; - Assist the resident to a standing position. 1. Record review of Resident #38's medical record showed: - Resident admitted on [DATE]; - Diagnoses of arthropathy (any disease of the joints, may cause joint inflammation, deterioration and limited movement), anxiety, bipolar disorder (a disorder with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs), conversion disorder (a condition where a mental health issue…
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 · D2022-08-31 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff maintained proper positioning and placement of catheter tubing and drainage bags on residents with an indwelling urinary catheter (a tube inserted into the urinary bladder to drain the bladder) and a suprapubic catheter (a hollow flexible tube inserted into the bladder through a cut in the abdomen to drain urine) for three residents (Resident #26, #38, and #45) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 53. Record review of the facility's Catheter Care policy and procedure, revised on 2/26/21, showed: - The facility will ensure any resident with a urinary catheter will be maintained to prevent infection; - Staff will make urine flows out of the the catheter into the drainage bag; - Staff to keep the urinary drainage bag below the level of the bladder to prevent back flow of the urine; - Staff to make sure the urinary drainage bag and catheter tubing does not touch the floor; - Catheter drainage bags will be placed in…
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 before2022-08-31 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an error rate of less than five percent (%) when medications were administered. There were 34 opportunities with three errors made, for an error rate of 8.82%. Out of ten residents observed, this affected one sampled resident (Resident #56) and two residents outside the sample (Resident #29 and #33). The facility census was 53. Record review of the facility's Medication Administration and Monitoring policy, revised 9/17/21, showed: - Medications to be given per doctors' orders. All medications will be recorded on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and signed immediately after the medications administered to the resident. The Nurse or Certified Medication Technician (CMT) will check each medication to the MAR noting correct name of medication, correct resident name, correct dose, correct time, and correct route of administration; - It will be imperative that all medications will be given using the seven rights to medication administration and that the professional caregiver ensures that…
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 · D2022-08-31 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label and store medications in a safe and effective manner. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 53. Record review of the facility's Monthly Inspections - Medications policy, dated 7/5/22, showed: - The charge nurse on night shift will complete a monthly review of all medication carts, treatment carts, and medication rooms on the last Saturday of every month; - The medication carts, treatment carts, and medication rooms will be reviewed for refrigerator temperature checks, medication expiration dates on the medication/treatment carts, and dated when opened items within the proper timeframe after opened in the medication rooms; - The charge nurse will correct any concerns identified by the audit; - The monthly Medication Room and Medication Cart Audit will be turned into the Resident Care Coordinator (RCC)/Director of Nursing (DON) after completed. Record review of the Medication Administering and Monitoring policy, revised 9/17/21, showed: - All medications, except for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-08-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 ensure the dish machine was free of debris and calcium buildup. The facility census was 53. Record review of the facility's Dietary Equipment Operations, Infection Control and Sanitation policy, revised 1/19/22, showed: - The dietary staff shall maintain the sanitation of the Dietary Department through compliance with written, comprehensive cleaning schedules developed for the facility by the Dietary Manager; - Operating instructions will be made available and cleaning procedures developed for all Dietary Department equipment; - Clean dish machine interior and exterior with de-liming solution weekly. Observations on 8/28/22 at 10:41 A.M., 8/29/22 at 10:08 A.M., and 8/30/22 at 12:02 P.M., of the kitchen showed: - Debris and calcium buildup visible on top of the dish machine. Record review of the kitchen's monthly cleaning schedule showed: - January 2022 through August 2022 cleaning schedules completed and initialed by staff; - Dish machine cleaning not addressed. During an interview on 8/30/22 at 11:11 A.M.,…
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 RELIANT CARE MANAGEMENT — 34 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 | 3 of 5 | 1.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 1.6 | +2.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 33 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| RELIANT CARE GROUP LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 12/01/2016 |
| RCG INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 12/01/2016 |
| RICHARD J. DESTEFANE REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2018 |
| DESTEFANE, RICHARD | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2018 |
| RELIANT CARE MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/28/2025 |
| ARSHAD, ABDULLAH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/15/2024 |
| MURRAY, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/15/2025 |
| TLG II LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2016 |
| WAYNE COUNTY ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
6 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 91% 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 $907K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Missouri Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 265547. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-21, 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.