Crown Rehab And Healthcare Center
3001 East Elm, Harrisonville, MO 64701 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 118 certified beds · (816) 380-6525 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — 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)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- about 20% 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 | 3 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 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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 | 11.8% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 5.3% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.8% | 1.1% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.9% | 2.3% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 44.2% | 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 | 5.5% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.3% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 32.5% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.0% | 90.9% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.2% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.9% | 17.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.2% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 43.7% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 34.8% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.7% | 13.7% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.63 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.76 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
48.5% 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 88 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 44.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 100 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 48.5%CMS range 36.0–59.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 7.8–13.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 44.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 38.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 28.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 88.6% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 95.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.4% | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 7.7%CMS range 4.9–11.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.13 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 118 beds and averages 97.8 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 20 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.19 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.53 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2025-03-24 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — patternAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
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 notify the resident or the resident's representative of meetings for care plan development, review, and revision, for three sampled residents (Resident #13, #32 and #40) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. Review of the facility policy titled Care Planning dated 10/24/22 showed: -The facility would develop a baseline and/or a comprehensive care plan for the residents. -The facility would provide a written summary of the baseline and/or comprehensive care plan to the resident and/or the resident's representative when the care plan was completed. -The medical record must contain evidence that the summary was given to the resident and/or the resident's representative. -The facility would invite the resident, if capable, and their family to the care plan meetings and use the best efforts to schedule the care plan meetings at times convenient for the resident and family. 1. Review of Resident #13's annual Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-03-24 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
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 annual evaluations for two sampled Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA),(CNA N and CNA P); and failed to provide the annual twelve hours of annual education to nursing assistants, based on their performance review for four sampled CNAs (CNA L, CNA N, CNA O, CNA P) out of five CNA's reviewed for annual evaluations and training's. The facility census was 99 residents. A policy for CNA Evaluations was requested and not provided by the date of exit. Review of the facility's undated policy titled Regular In-service Education showed: -All certified nursing personnel was required to complete at least 12 hours of in-service education annually from their date of hire. -Certified staff members who do not meet this requirement will be removed from the schedule. 1. Review of the education documentation showed: -CNA L had 3 hours of in-service training and lacked 9 hours of training. -CNA N had 3 hours of in-service training and lacked 9 hours of training. -CNA O had 3 hours of in-service training and lacked 9 hours of training.…
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 · E2025-03-24 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided food that was at a safe and appetizing temperature for three sampled residents (Resident #14, #25, and #34) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. Review of the facility policy titled food temperatures dated 10/24/22 showed: -Insert the thermometer into the center of the product. -Wait until there is no movement for 15 seconds. Several readings may be needed to determine hot and cold spots. -Take the temperature of each pan of product before serving. -Acceptable serving temperatures were: --Hot cereal and gravy should be 135 degrees Fahrenheit (F). --Casseroles, Meat entrees, potatoes, pasta, soup, pureed food, vegetables, coffee, and eggs should be greater than 135 degrees F. --Hazardous salads, desserts, milk, and juice should be less than 41 degrees F. --Pastries, cakes should be less than 60 degrees F. -If temperatures did not meet the required serving temperatures, reheat the product or chill the product to the proper temperature. -If temperatures were not 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 and interview, the facility failed to maintain the cleanliness in the kitchen by not removing rust and grime from one shelf in the walk-in cooler; failed to clean and maintain four ceiling vent covers over the hot drink preparation area and the hand washing sink dish washing areas. This practice potentially affected all residents who ate food from the kitchen. The facility census was 99 residents. Review of the facility's Cleaning Schedule policy, dated 10/24/22, showed: -The dietary staff maintained a sanitary environment by complying with routine cleaning schedules developed by the Dietary Manager. 1. Observation on 3/18/25 from 9:26 A.M. to 11:14 A.M. of the kitchen showed: -Two ceiling vent covers over the hot beverage preparation area were discolored with dark brown or black grime, dust or debris. -Two ceiling vent covers over the handwashing sink and dishwashing areas were discolored with dark brown or black grime, dust or debris. -One shelf inside the reach-in doors of the walk-in cooler was covered in a dark sticky substance and had rusted areas. During…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-24 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate and timely tuberculosis (TB - a communicable disease that affects especially the lungs, that is characterized by fever, cough, difficulty in breathing, abnormal lung tissue and function) testing was completed for three sampled residents (Residents #79, #246, and #196) out of five residents sampled for tuberculosis screening/testing; and failed to ensure appropriate hand hygiene and infection control practices during incontinence care for three sampled residents (Resident #73, #246, and #21) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. Review of the facility Tuberculosis - Screening policy dated 10/24/22 showed: -Residents are to be screened for tuberculosis upon admission, readmission, and as indicated. -Any resident without a documented negative tuberculosis skin test (TST) within the previous 12 months receives a two-step TST upon admission. -When the first TST is negative, a follow-up TST 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-24 · 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 completion, submission and retention of a Level I Nursing Facility Pre-admission Screening for Mental Illness, Intellectual Disability or Related Condition (PASRR-a federally mandated screening process for individuals with serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability/developmental disability related diagnosis who apply or reside in Medicaid (program that helps with medical costs for some people with limited income and resources) certified beds in a nursing facility regardless of the source of payment. The screening assures appropriate placement of persons known or suspected of having a mental impairment(s) and that the individual needs of mentally impaired persons can be and are being met in the appropriate placement environment) for one sampled resident (Resident #4) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. 1. Review of Resident # 4's admission Record showed he/she was admitted on [DATE] with the following…
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 before2025-03-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure bathing/showers were completed twice weekly and with the resident's preference considered for two sampled residents (Resident #4 and #79) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. A policy for showers/bathing was requested and was not received at the time of exit. 1. Review of Resident #4's admission Record showed he/she was admitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: -Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis (muscle weakness or partial paralysis on one side of the body) affecting left non-dominant side 3/4/20. -Traumatic brain compression without herniation (TBI-a condition where a head injury causes the brain to be compressed, but the brain tissue does not shift or herniate [an abnormal condition in which an organ or other tissue protrudes through an opening or narrow space] through the openings in the skull, subsequent encounter 10/05/2021. -Cognitive (involving conscious intellectual activity) communication…
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 before2025-03-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 communication and coordination of care with a resident's hospice (end of life care) provider for one sampled resident (Resident #73) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. Review of the facility's End of Life Care policy dated 10/24/22 showed no instructions on how the hospice provider and the facility will communicate with one another to ensure coordination of care. 1. Review of Resident #73's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted on [DATE] and was receiving hospice services. Review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 1/21/25 showed the resident: -Was severely cognitively impaired. -Was receiving hospice services. Review of the facility's hospice provider communication book showed: -The front of the binder included written instructions for the facility to access the residents' who received…
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 · D2025-03-24 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing 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 maintain audiological (science and medicine concerned with the sense of hearing) health by not following up with the audiologist recommendations for one sampled resident (Resident #28) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. 1. Review of Resident #28's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff for care planning), dated 8/24/24, showed: -The resident was cognitively intact. -The resident's hearing was adequate. Review of the resident's audiology report, dated 9/20/24, showed: -Ear exam results were abnormal in the resident's right ear. -The resident had impacted cerumen (ear wax) in both ears. -Removal of ear wax was attempted via suction. -Due to depth of the cerumen, it was not completely removed. -Refer for Debrox drops (a medicine for ear wax removal) and to follow facility protocol for cerumen management. Review of the resident's Physician Order Summary (POS)…
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 · D2025-03-24 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
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 necessary treatment and foot care for one sampled resident (Resident #25) out of 20 sampled residents. The facility census was 99 residents. Review of the facility's policy titled Grooming Care of the fingernails and toenails dated as revised 10/24/22 showed: -Toenails were to be trimmed by Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA)s except for residents with the following conditions: --Diabetes or circulatory impairment. --Ingrown, infected, or painful nails. --Nails that are too hard, thick, or difficult to cut easily. -High risk residents and residents with hypertrophic (thickened and deformed nails that can be caused by fungal infections, older age, psoriasis (a skin disease that causes red, itchy scaly patches), and other factors), mycotic (a fungal infection causes the nail to separate from the nail bed, making it thick and fragile) and keratotic (characterized by thickened, rough, and often chalky-white or yellow-brown patches 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.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-24 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — isolatedEnsure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
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 two sampled Nurse Assistants (NAs) (NA A and NA B) completed the Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) training program within four months of his/her employment in the facility. The facility census was 99 residents. A policy was requested and was not received by the exit date. 1. Review of the facility spreadsheet for NA training on 3/19/24 showed: -NA A's date of hire was 7/28/24 with a completion deadline of the CNA training by 11/25/24. -He/She had worked on the following days: --3/3/25 on the day shift. --3/4/25 on the day shift. --3/10/25 on the day shift. --3/11/25 on the day shift. --3/12/25 on the day shift. --3/17/25 on the day shift. --3/18/25 on the day shift. -NA B's date of hire was 9/9/24 with a completion deadline of the CNA training by 1/7/25. -He/She had worked on the following days: --3/3/25 on the day shift. --3/4/25 on the day shift. --3/10/25 on the day shift. --3/11/25 on the day shift. --3/17/25 on the day shift. --3/18/25 on the day shift. During an interview on 3/19/25 at 1:44 P.M. NA A said:…
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 · F2023-07-21 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
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 pre-prepared menus to ensure they met the nutritional adequacy needs of residents, in accordance with established national guidelines and professional standards for food service. This deficient practice potentially affected all residents who ate food from the kitchen. The facility's census was 88 residents with a licensed capacity for 118 residents at the time of the survey. 1. Review of the pre-prepared menus for the current month provided by the Dietary Manager (DM) showed the following: -The menus had the facility's food vendor name at the top left. -The lunch for Monday the 17th was listed as bacon wrapped beef, country mashed potatoes, and mixed vegetables. -The lunch for Tuesday the 18th was listed as a hot dog on a bun, crispy French fries, cucumber salad, and a cottage cheese/pineapple salad. -The lunch for Wednesday the 19th was listed as Frito chili pie, buttered corn, and jello salad. During an interview on 7/17/23 at 9:08 A.M. the DM said the following: -Their food vendor delivered every…
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 before2023-07-21 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to keep the Dry Storage (DS) room, walk-in refrigerator, and walk-in freezer floors clean; to maintain sanitary beverage dispensers; to maintain plastic plate covers and utensils in good condition to avoid food safety hazards (cross-contamination); and failed to separate damaged foodstuffs, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all residents, visitors, volunteers, and staff who ate food from the kitchen. The facility's census was 88 residents with a licensed capacity for 118 residents at the time of the survey. 1. Observation on 7/17/23 between 8:29 A.M. and 9:26 A.M. during the initial kitchen inspection showed the following: -There was a 6 pound (lb.) 12 ounce (oz.) can of chili with beans on a can dispenser rack in the DS area that was dented on one side toward the top rim. -There were several crumbs and two strips of plastic under the racks in the DS area. -There was plastic, paper, an onion skin, and a butter pod under 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 · E2023-07-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 the narcotic count sheet was signed by both the on-coming and the off-going nurses to verify the correct count of narcotics. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's policy, Controlled Medication Storage, dated 11/2017 showed: -Medications included in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) classification as controlled substances were subject to special handling, storage, disposal and record keeping in the nursing care center in accordance with federal, state and other applicable laws and regulations. -The Director of Nursing (DON) and the consultant pharmacist monitor for compliance with federal and state laws and regulations in the handling of controlled medications. -The medication nurse on duty maintains possession of the key to the controlled medication storage areas. -At each shift change or when keys were surrendered, a physical inventory of all Scheduled II, including refrigerated items, was to have been conducted by two licensed nurses and was to have been documented on 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 · E2023-07-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored securely; failed to ensure other objects were not in with the residents' prescribed medications; failed to ensure refrigerators that store residents' prescribed medications and supplements were kept within the required temperatures; failed to ensure the sink in the medication room was kept clean and hand soap and towels were available to wash hands, and failed to ensure medication carts were not left unlocked while nursing staff was not in attendance of the medication cart. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's policy, Storage of Medication, dated 1/2021 showed: -Medications and biologicals were to have been stored properly, following the manufacturer's recommendation, to maintain their integrity and to support safe effective drug administration. -The medication supply was to have been accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. -Medication rooms, cabinets and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-07-21 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy to complete testing to screen residents upon admission for tuberculosis (TB- a communicable disease that affects especially the lungs, that is characterized by fever, cough, difficulty in breathing, abnormal lung tissue and function) for two sampled residents (Resident #83, and #75) out of five sampled residents; the facility failed to follow infection control protocols during wound care for three sampled residents (Residents #23, #25 and #35), and to clean/sanitize scissors properly before and after use between residents for two sampled residents (Residents #25 and #35) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's Tuberculosis Screening policy dated 10/24/22 showed: -All residents were to be screened upon admission to the facility. -Any resident without documented negative TB skin tests (TST) or chest x-ray within the previous 12 months would receive a baseline TST. -When…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one sampled resident (Resident #64) had a code status upon admission out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's policy, Advance Directives, dated October 24, 2022 showed: -The Facility would respect a resident's advance directive and would comply with the resident's wishes expressed in an advance directive. -Upon admission, the admission Staff or designee would obtain a copy of a resident's advance directive. -A copy of the resident's advance directive would have been included in the resident's medical record. -If the resident did not have an Advance Directive, the Facility would have provided the resident and/or resident's next of kin with information about advance directives upon request. -An Advance Directive was defined as a resident's written preference regarding treatment options. -Upon admission, the admission Staff or designee would have provided written information to the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 reassess the effectiveness of individualized resident care and interventions by not reviewing and revising resident care plans (a document that specified health care and supported needs and outlined how the facility met resident requirements) for one sampled resident (Resident #23) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's Care Planning policy, dated 10/24/22, showed: -The purpose of the policy was to ensure a comprehensive person-centered care plan was developed for each resident based on their individual needs. -The care plan served to help the resident move toward resident-specific goals which addressed the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs. -The care plan was updated as indicated for changes in condition, onset of new problems, and resolution of current problems and as deemed appropriate. -Changes may be made to the care plan on an ongoing basis for the duration of 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 before2023-07-21 · 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 complete labs as ordered for one sampled resident (Resident #31) out of five residents sampled for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's laboratory, diagnostic and radiology services policy dated 10/24/22 showed: -The facility was to ensure they provided laboratory services to meet the residents' needs. -The facility would coordinate lab services based on orders from an appropriate practitioner. -The facility was responsible for the timeliness of the lab services. 1. Review of Resident #31's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 5/15/23 showed the following staff assessment of the resident: -Moderately cognitively impaired. -Some of his/her diagnoses included anemia (when the red blood cell or hemoglobin is below normal so there aren't enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to the body's tissues), heart failure (condition in which the heart cannot pump enough blood to all…
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 before2023-07-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide nail care for one sampled resident (Resident #83) and failed to respond promptly to one supplemental resident's (Resident #27) call bell/light out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's policy titled Communication - Call System dated 10/24/22 showed: -The call system was used to provide a mechanism for residents to promptly communicate with nursing staff. -The facility would provide a call system to enable residents to alert the nursing staff from their beds and toileting/bathing facilities. -Nursing staff should answer call bells promptly. -When answering a request, nursing staff will return with the item or reply promptly. Review of the facility's Care and Services policy dated 10/24/22 showed residents were to receive the necessary care and services based on an individualized comprehensive assessment process. 1. Review of Resident #27's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
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 two sampled residents (Residents #13 and #16) received dental services out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's dental policy showed: -The facility would assist residents with referrals for dental services, including coordinating transportation within three business days or less from the time of damage or loss to dentures. -If a referral was not made within three days, the facility had to provide documentation of they did to ensure the resident could still eat and drink adequately while awaiting dental services. 1. Review of Resident #16's entry tracking form showed he/she admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the resident's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 4/1/23 showed the following staff assessment of the resident: -Cognitively intact. -Understands others and was understood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0825 — isolatedProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a resident.
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 restorative care (a program to maintain a person's highest level of physical, mental, and psychosocial function in order to prevent declines that impact quality of life) following discharge from therapy services for one sampled resident (Resident #77) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 88 residents. Review of the facility's Restorative Nursing Program Guidelines policy, dated 10/24/2022, showed: -The program focused on achieving and maintaining physical, mental and psychosocial functioning. -Residents were started on the Restorative Nursing Program: --Upon admission to the facility with restorative needs, but was not a candidate for formalized rehabilitation therapy; --When restorative needs arose during the course of a longer-term stay; --When a resident was discharged from formalized physical, occupational or speech rehabilitation therapy. -The Director of Nursing (DON) managed and directed the Restorative Nursing Program with consultation from rehabilitation professionals. -General restorative…
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 · E2022-03-07 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure they completed a check of the Employee Disqualification List (EDL) and/or Criminal Background Check (CBC) and/or the Nurse Aide (NA) Registry to ensure they did not have a Federal Indicator (a marker given to a potential employee who has committed abuse, neglect, or misappropriation of property against residents) prior to hire for six sampled staff out of 10 staff sampled. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's employment screening policy dated 2/1/22 showed: -Check the EDL at least two days prior to scheduled resident contact on all newly employed individuals. -Check the CBC through the use of the Family Care Safety Registry at least two days prior to scheduled resident contact on all newly employed individuals. -Request a CBC on any individuals not registered with the Family Care Safety Registry. -Check the NA Registry at least two days prior to scheduled resident contact on all newly employed individuals. 1. Record review of the facility's list of employees hired since their last…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide regular bathing assistance for seven sampled residents (Residents #7, #49, #65, #276, #31, #226, and #73) that were dependent upon staff assistance for bathing assistance out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADLs-bathing, grooming, hygiene, etc.), Supporting dated March 2018 showed ADLs should be provided for residents who are unable to carry out their own ADLs independently. 1. Record review of Resident #7's undated face sheet showed: -The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. -Some of his/her diagnoses included heart disease and kidney failure. Record review of the resident's interdisciplinary notes dated 9/24/21 to 3/3/22 showed no documentation regarding the resident's bathing/showering. Record review of the resident's January 2022 bath/shower sheets showed the resident received assistance with showering: -Once…
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 · E2022-03-07 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain annual competencies and skill sets of at least 12 hours of education in-services/training of facility licensed nursing staff, Certified Medication Technicians (CMT's), and Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA's). The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility Staffing policy dated October 2017 showed the facility provides sufficient numbers of staff with the skills and competency necessary to provide care and services for all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment. 1. Record review of the facility In-Service Training Program, Nursing Assistant dated May 2019 showed: -All nursing assistant personnel participate in regularly scheduled in-service training classes. -The facility completes a performance review of nursing assistants at least every 12 months. -In-service training is based on the outcome of the annual performance review, addressing weaknesses identified in the reviews. Record review of the facility Competency of Nursing Staff policy…
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 · E2022-03-07 · tag F0732 — patternPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 staffing information was posted in a prominent place, readily accessible to residents and visitors. This practice had the potential to affect residents and visitors who were inquiring about the facility staffing hours. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing Numbers dated July 2016 showed: -Within two hours of the beginning of each shift the number of Licensed Nurses [Registered Nurses (RN's), Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN's), and Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVN's)] and the number of unlicensed nursing personnel [Certified Nurse Aides (CNA's) directly responsible for resident care will be posted in a prominent location (accessible to residents and visitors) and in a clear and readable format. -Shift staffing information shall be recorded on the Nursing Staff Directly Responsible for Resident Care form for each shift. -The information recorded on the form shall include: --The name of the facility. --The date for which the information 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-07 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 a bed hold policy at the time of or within 24 hours of the resident's discharge to the hospital for two sampled residents (Resident #3 and #65) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's bed-holds and returns policy dated 2019 showed that prior to transferring a resident, the facility would inform the resident or the resident's representatives in writing of the bed-hold and return policy. 1. Record review of Resident #3's entry tracking record showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of the resident's general note dated 11/16/21 showed he/she was sent to the hospital due to decreased mental status and a fever. Record review of the resident's electronic health record showed no documentation that a bed hold policy was provided to the resident or the resident's responsible party when transferring to the hospital on [DATE]. Record review of the resident's long-term…
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 before2022-03-07 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer Levothyroxine (Synthroid used for thyroid hormone replacement) according to manufacturer's instructions for two sampled residents (Resident #11 and # 68) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's policy titled Medication Administration dated 1/21 showed: -Medications were to be administered as prescribed in accordance with manufacturer's specification. -Personnel authorized to administer medication do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. -If necessary the nurse would contact the prescriber for clarification. -The interaction with the pharmacy and the resulting order clarification would be documented in the nursing notes. -Medications to be given on an empty stomach or before meals were to be scheduled for administration 30 minutes to two hours prior to meals. Record review of the manufacturer's website Abbvie Synthroid dated 2020 showed:…
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 before2022-03-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 identify edema with a weight gain and notify the Physician for one sampled resident (Resident #14) and to provide medication and a treatment for a resident with skin issues that had been prescribed by the physician for one sampled resident (Resident #49) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's policy titled Medication Administration dated 1/21 showed medications were to be administered as prescribed. Record review of the facility's policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADLs- bathing, grooming, hygiene, etc.), Supporting dated March 2018 showed ADLs should be provided for residents who are unable to carry out their own ADLs independently. 1. Record review of Resident #14's face sheet showed he/she was been admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: -Heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart doesn't pump blood as well as it should…
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 · D2022-03-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 follow through with pharmacy recommendations to reduce anti-psychotic medications for one sampled resident (Resident #71) out of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's Medication Utilization and Prescribing - Clinical Protocol policy, dated April 2018, showed: -When a medication was prescribed for any reason the physician and staff would identify the indications, considering the resident's age, medical and psychiatric conditions, risks, health status and existing medication regimen. -A diagnosis by itself may not be sufficient justification for prescribing a medication. -The existence of a condition or risk does not necessarily require a treatment and the treatment may be something besides, or in addition to, medication. -As part of the overall review, the physician and staff would evaluate the rationale for existing medications that lack a clear indication or are being used intermittently on an as…
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 · D2022-03-07 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 determine the vaccination status related to a influenza (flu) vaccine for one sampled resident (Resident #126); and to obtain vaccination status for influenza, pneumococcal (pneumonia) and Covid-19 immunizations for one sampled resident (Resident #35) out of five residents sampled for vaccination review. The facility census was 86 residents. Record review of the facility's flu vaccine policy dated August 2016 showed: -Between October 1st and March 31st each year, the flu vaccine would be offered to residents unless the vaccine was medically contraindicated or the resident was already immunized. -Any refusal of a vaccine by a resident would be charted in their medical record. Record review of the facility's pneumococcal (pneumonia) vaccine policy dated August 2016 showed: -Prior to or upon admission, residents were to be assessed for the eligibility to receive the pneumonia vaccine series, and when indicated, would be offered within 30 days of admission…
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 AMA HOLDINGS — 13 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 | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MO OPERATION HOLDINGS DE SPE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 99% | since 01/25/2024 |
| AMA HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2022 |
| DEF HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2022 |
| MARX, ASHER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2022 |
| WOLF, JACQUES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 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.
This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% 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 265647. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-24, 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.