Holden Manor Health & Rehabilitation
2005 South Lexington, Holden, MO 64040 · For profit - Corporation · 52 certified beds · (816) 732-4138 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2023
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0568, F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (78%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 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 held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 14.6% | 18.1% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.2% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.5% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.8% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 10.5% | 18.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.8% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.7% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 38.7% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 28.2% | 90.9% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.9% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.9% | 17.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.4% | 23.5% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 42.9% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.64 | 2.11 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.64 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
31.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 31.8%CMS range 23.1–47.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.3%CMS range 8.2–17.9 | 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 | 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 | 85.7% | 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 — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 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 | 1.35 | 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 52 beds and averages 35.2 residents a day — about 68% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.07 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.96 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 2.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.19 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 78% 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.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-22 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
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 residents were treated with dignity when one resident (Resident #1) alleged that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) A put his/her hands on the resident and pushed him/her in the shoulders, causing the resident to be scared and angry. The facility census was 34 residents.The Administrator and the Regional Nurse Consultant were notified on 1/22/26 of the past noncompliance which began on 1/11/26. The facility immediately completed an all-staff education for Abuse and Neglect and customer service. The deficiency was corrected on 1/19/26. Review of the facility's Dignity Policy, undated, showed:-Each resident was cared for in a manner that promoted and enhanced his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem.-Residents were treated with dignity and respect at all times.-When assisting with care, residents are supported in exercising their rights.-Staff speak respectfully to residents at all times.-Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromised…
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 before2024-08-02 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to remove a buildup of dust and food debris from under the reach-in refrigerator; failed to label items that were not easily identifiable in the containers those items were in; failed to ensure employees washed hands after handling non-food items then going back to handling food items; failed to prevent the buildup of debris in the window unit air conditioner; failed to check the temperature of food items before placing those items on the steam table; failed to ensure the pot holder was free from damage that could allow fibers to contaminate food; failed to ensure dietary employees handled containers used or serving residents, without contaminating those containers; failed to use a three-step (wash, rinse and sanitize) process to wash the food processor container between foods; failed to store a box of individual packets of butter according to the storage instructions on the box; failed to maintain the lower part of the toaster free from a heavy buildup of crumbs. This practice potentially affected all residents. The facility…
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 before2024-08-02 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to perform adequate hand hygiene during medication pass for three supplemental residents (Resident's #11, #27, and #10) out of nine supplemental residents and failed to create and implement a Tubercolosis (TB, a potentially serious infectious bacterial lung disease) program when staff failed to complete two-step Mantoux skin tests (a test to show potential TB infection) for two sampled residents (Resident #141 and #241). The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the facility's policy titled Handwashing/Hand Hygiene dated August 2019 showed: -The facility considered hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections. -All personnel should be trained and regularly in-serviced on the importance of hand hygiene in preventing the transmission of healthcare-associated infections. -All personnel should follow the handwashing/ hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infections to other personnel, residents, and visitors. -Hands should be washed with soap (antimicrobial or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-02 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain evidence (via receipts or signatures) for monetary transactions in the resident trust fund accounts for two sampled residents (Resident #2 and #3) out of four sampled residents; and failed to maintain a proper accounting of the end of month petty cash (the amount of cash that is accessible for residents with resident trust that residents can request funds from) amounts from July 2023 through April 2024. This practice potentially affected 22 residents with resident trust. The facility census was 46 residents. 1. Review of Resident #2's resident trust fund transactions list dated 4/1/24 through 7/31/24 showed: - A transaction dated 5/6/24 for $40.41 without a receipt or signature for that transaction. - A transaction dated 6/14/24 for $18.97, without a receipt for that transaction. 2. Review of Resident #3's resident trust fund transaction list dated 4/1/24 trough 7/31/24, showed a transaction for $28.56, without a receipt or a signature for that transaction. During an interview on 8/2/24 at 10:32 A.M. the Regional…
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 · E2024-08-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain the ambient (pervasive quality of the surrounding environment) temperature of Resident #291's room, and resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], within the required Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) regulatory requirement of 71-81 ºF (degrees Fahrenheit) failed to monitor temperatures of those rooms when those rooms felt warm, failed to ensure all staff knew where the locations of the thermometers and failed to ensure that two of the facility thermometers were properly operating. The facility also failed to maintain the restroom floor in resident room [ROOM NUMBER] free from a pungent urine odor; failed to maintain the floors in resident rooms [ROOM NUMBER] free from a buildup of debris; failed to maintain the filter of the climate control unit in resident room [ROOM NUMBER] free of dust and mildew; failed to maintain the fans in resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] and the therapy room free of a heavy buildup of dust; failed 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 · E2024-08-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications brought in by one sampled resident's (Resident #33) family member was labeled and stored correctly in the Certified Medication Technician (CMT) cart out of 14 sampled residents; failed to ensure other medications in the CMT cart were stored and labeled appropriately and failed to dispose of expired medical supplies found in the medication room which had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the facility's policy titled Labeling of Medication Containers dated [DATE] showed: -Medication labels were to be legible at all times. -Labels for individual resident medications included all necessary information, such as: --The resident's name. --The prescribing physician's name. --The name, address, and telephone number of the issuing pharmacy. --The name, strength, and quantity of the drug. --The prescription number, if applicable. --The date the medication was…
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 · E2024-08-02 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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 ensure recipes were available for dietary staff to use while making pureed (food that is blended, chopped, mashed, or strained until it becomes a soft and smooth consistency) waffles, chicken tenders and pureed mixed vegetables; and the facility failed to ensure the recipes for the pureed versions of those items were detailed enough to include the amounts of liquids and/or thickener that were needed to make the recipe properly. This practice potentially affected five residents with pureed diets. The facility census was 46 residents. 1. Observation on 7/29/24 at 8:17 A.M., showed Dietary [NAME] (DC) A made pureed waffles without having the recipe book open. During an interview on 7/29/24 at 8:41 A.M. the Dietary Director said he/she was not able to print off the recipe for pureed waffles because the computer was down. Review of the pureed recipe for waffles on 7/29/24 showed: -The recipe was dated 9/15/17. -Remove desired number of servings and add nutritive liquid (milk, broth, etc.). Blend until desired…
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 · E2024-08-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the pureed french fries were palatable and failed to ensure the dinner rolls were cooked properly for the lunch meal on 8/2/24. The facility census was 46 residents. 1. Review of Resident #15's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool completed by the facility for care planning) dated 12/20/23, showed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #31's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], showed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the Resident Council minutes dated 12/5/23 showed: -Resident #15 said the food was not good. -Resident #31 said the food was bad. Review of the Resident Council Minutes dated 1/2/24 showed Resident #15 said the food was still not good. 2. Observation on 7/29/24 at 11:16 A.M., showed DC A pureed French Fries in the food processor, DC A added cold milk to the fries in the food with no recipe book used at that time. DC A did not taste the pureed fries after the fries…
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 · E2024-08-02 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the pureed (food that is blended, chopped, mashed, or strained until it becomes a soft and smooth consistency) chicken tenders and french fries were pureed to smooth consistency. This practice potentially affected 5 residents with pureed diets. The facility census was 46 residents. 1. Review of the pureed recipe for chicken tenders dated 9/5/17, showed: -Remove desired number of servings and add nutritive liquid (milk, broth, etc.). -Blend until desired consistency. Add approved thickener to achieve desired consistency if needed. The recipe did not state how much liquid or thickener to add per the number of servings that needed to be pureed. Observation on 7/29/24 at 10:59 A.M., showed: - Dietary [NAME] (DC) A pureed the chicken, by adding an unmeasured amount of chicken base, and added water to the food processing container which contained the chicken and the base and pureed the ingredients together. - DC A did not have a recipe book opened. - DC A did not taste the pureed chicken tenders and placed…
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 before2024-08-02 · tag F0813 — patternHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
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 facility's policy regarding the proper storage was followed, when food was stored in the resident use refrigerator. This practice potentially affected at least 4 residents who had food stored in the resident use refrigerator. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the policy entitled Foods Brought by Family/Visitors dated 10/17, showed: -Food brought to the facility by visitors and family is permitted. Facility staff will strive to balance resident choice and a homelike environment with the nutritional and safety needs of residents. -Nursing staff will provide family/visitors who wish to bring foods to the facility with a copy of this policy. Residents will also be provided a copy in a language and format he/she can understand. -Food brought by family/visitors that is left with the resident to consume later, will be labeled and stored in a manner that is clearly distinguishable from facility prepared food. -Non perishable foods will be stored in resealable containers with tight fitting…
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 28 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-02 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop 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 ensure pneumococcal pneumonia vaccines (a vaccine to protect against pneumococcal disease caused by the bacteria Streptococcus pneumoniae) were offered, administered, or documented for three sampled residents (Residents #10, #141, #241) out of five residents sampled for vaccination provision. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of an undated facility policy titled Pneumococcal Vaccines showed: -All residents would be offered pneumococcal vaccines to aid in preventing pneumococcal infections. -Upon admission, residents would be assessed for eligibility to receive the pneumococcal vaccine and, if eligible, receive the vaccine within 30 days of admission. -Assessments of the residents' vaccination status would occur within five days of admission. -Any vaccine refusals or administrations would be documented in the residents' medical record. Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults,…
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 · E2024-08-02 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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 and interview, the facility failed to maintain the kitchen area and resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], free of ants. This practice affected the kitchen and affected 4 residents who resided in those rooms. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the policy entitled Foods Brought by Family/Visitors dated 10/17, showed: -Food brought to the facility by visitors and family is permitted. Facility staff will strive to balance resident choice and a homelike environment with the nutritional and safety needs of residents. -Non perishable foods will be stored in resalable containers with tight fitting lids. Intact fresh fruit may be stored without a lid. 1. Observations on 7/29/24 at 11:06 A.M., showed the presence of ants at the 3-compartment sink location. During an interview on 7/29/24 at 11:49 A.M., the Maintenance Director said he/she was unaware of ants in the kitchen before today. 2. Observation on 7/30/24 at 11:12 A.M., showed the presence of ants in resident room [ROOM NUMBER].…
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 · D2024-08-02 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain an authorization signature from one sampled resident (Resident #291) to allow the facility to open and maintain a resident trust account out of four sampled residents sampled for resident trust accounts. The facility census was 46 residents. 1. Review of Resident #291's trust account on 8/2/24 showed: -The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. -The resident had a balance of $0.0 in his/her account -The absence of an authorization form that was signed by the resident. During an interview on 8/2/24 at 10:21 A.M. the Regional Business Office Manager (BOM) said he/she gave the form to the new facility BOM, but the new facility BOM did not have the resident sign the authorization form. During a telephone interview on 8/8/24 at 2:42 P.M., the previous BOM said: -He/she worked as the BOM until 7/15/24 then became the Activity Director. -The resident's account was opened on 7/22/24.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-02 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
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 funds of one discharged resident (Resident #93) was forwarded to the resident within 5 days of the resident moving to a new facility; and failed to ensure that Third Party Liability (TPL- a form which is sent to Missouri (MO) Health Net, which gives an accounting of the remaining balance of that resident's funds in the resident trust account) forms were completed and sent to Missouri (MO) Healthnet (a state agency which administers the provision and payment of services for Missouri's Medicaid program) within 30 days of death for two discharged residents (Resident #91 and #92). The facility census was 46 residents. 1. Review of Resident #93's medical record, showed: -He/she was discharged from the facility to a hospital on 1/25/24. - The residents' fund account, showed he/she had $80.24 in his/her resident trust account at the time of discharge. - The resident was discharged from the hospital to another facility on 2/6/24. -There was no documentation that showed the resident's money was sent to the resident 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 · D2024-08-02 · 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 timely advanced directive for one sampled resident (Resident #291) when he/she elected to be a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR, an election to have Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation [CPR] withheld in the event of cardiac arrest) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the undated facility policy titled Advanced Directives showed the facility was to: -Inform and offer the resident a choice to elect to be a DNR on admission. -Assist the resident in obtaining an advanced directive. -Ensure coordination with the physician to enact the advanced directive. -Update the plan of care and place orders in the medical record. 1. Review of the resident's medical record showed: -An admission to the facility on [DATE]. -An out of hospital DNR form signed by the resident on [DATE] with no other signatures. Review of the resident's Physician Order Summary (POS) on [DATE] showed an order for the resident to be a full code (an election…
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 · D2024-08-02 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 complete Minimum Data Set assessments (MDS-a federally mandated comprehensive assessment) in a timely manner (within 14 calendar days after admission) for two sampled residents (Resident #291 and Resident #292); and failed to complete an accurate MDS assessment for one sampled resident (Resident #1) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of an undated facility policy titled MDS Completion and Submission Timeframes showed the facility was to complete and submit MDS assessments within federal requirements but lacked mention of the specific guidelines. No other policies for MDS assessments were received. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, dated October 2023, showed facilities were to complete and submit resident admission assessments within 14 calendar days of admission to the facility. 1. Review of Resident #291's face sheet on 8/1/24…
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 before2024-08-02 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to create person-centered comprehensive care plans to guide facility staff in resident care of new admissions for two sampled residents (Residents #291 and #292) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of an undated facility policy titled Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plans showed the facility was to: -Complete a person-centered care plan for all residents. -Complete the care plan within seven days of a comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) admission assessment. --The policy lacked direction for staff on when to complete the comprehensive care plan without completion of the comprehensive assessment. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, dated October 2023, showed facilities were to complete a comprehensive, person-centered care plan within seven days of completion of the MDS admission assessment but no later than 21 days…
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 · D2024-08-02 · 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 was completed per choice for one sampled resident (Resident #2) and failed to ensure the resident's care plan showed the resident's care needs and abilities regarding Activities of Daily Living (ADL-bathing, dressing, toileting, eating and mobility) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the facility's ADL policy and procedure dated March 2018, showed: -Residents would be provided with care, treatment and services to ensure their ADLs do not diminish unless the circumstances of their clinical condition demonstrate that diminishing ADLS are unavoidable. -Appropriate care and services would be provided for resident's who were unable to carry out ADLs independently with the consent of the resident and in accordance with the plan of care. -A resident's ability to perform ADLs will be measured using clinical tools, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated assessment tool 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 · D2024-08-02 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to address one sampled the resident's behavioral symptoms in order to manage known behaviors, failed to ensure the resident's behaviors were monitored and documented by staff as they occurred and failed to ensure actions and interventions were implemented upon the first aggressive behavior and subsequently followed up on to ensure resident behaviors toward his/her roommate did not continue for sampled resident (Resident #141) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the facility's Behavioral Assessment, Intervention and Monitoring policy and procedure dated March 2019, showed: -As part of the initial assessment, the nursing staff and attending physician will identify individuals with a history of impaired cognition, altered behavior, substance use disorder or mental disorder. -As part of the comprehensive assessment, staff will evaluate, based on input from 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 · D2024-08-02 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' monthly Medication Regimen Review (MRR-thorough evaluation of the medication regimen of a resident, with the goal of promoting positive outcomes and minimizing adverse consequences and potential risks associated with medication) were completed by the pharmacy to ensure irregularities were identified so they could be acted upon for one sampled resident (Resident #1) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the facility's policy titled MRRs dated May 2019 showed: -The goal of the MRR was to promote positive outcomes while minimizing adverse consequences and potential risks associated with medication. -The MRR involved a thorough review of the resident's medical record to prevent, identify, report, and resolve medication related problems, medications errors, and other irregularities. -Copies of MRR reports, including physician responses, were maintained as part of the permanent medical record. 1. Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet showed he/she admitted to the facility…
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 · D2024-08-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete recommended Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR- involves the stepwise tapering of a dose of medication to determine if symptoms, conditions, or risks can be managed by a lower dose or the medication can be discontinued altogether) and/or (MRR-thorough evaluation of the medication regimen of a resident, with the goal of promoting positive outcomes and minimizing adverse consequences and potential risks associated with medication) for psychotropic medications (drugs which affect psychic function, behavior, or experience) for three sampled residents (Resident #1, #18 and #33) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 46 residents. Review of the facility's policy titled MRRs dated May 2019 showed: -The goal of the MRR was to promote positive outcomes while minimizing adverse consequences and potential risks associated with medication. -The MRR involved a thorough review of the resident's medical record to prevent, identify, report, and resolve…
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 before2023-01-13 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to store dishes in a manner to prevent contamination; to ensure two ceiling vents were free from a buildup of dust; to label four containers with the contents of what was in those containers; to maintain the gasket (a piece of rubber or some other material that is used to make a tight seal between two parts that are joined together) one of the reach-in refrigerators; to maintain the blade portion of a spatula in an easily condition; and to maintain the stovetop free of a heavy buildup of food debris and grease. This practice potentially affected all residents. The facility census was 41 residents. 1. Observations on 1/9/23 from 9:22 A.M. through 12:55 P.M., showed: -Two ceiling vents over dishwasher with a heavy buildup of dust inside those vents. -Five pitchers were stored on top of a refrigerator with the container side facing up. -One stainless steel container with contents that had no identifying label, one bottle of a clear liquid with no identifying label and one bottle with a white powdery substance with no identifying…
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 before2023-01-13 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its Water Management Plan outlined plans for implementing testing protocols and plans for corrective actions that the facility would implement as a result of changes in municipal or facility water quality; and to ensure proper hand hygiene was performed during a medication pass. The facility census was 41 residents. 1. Record review of the guidance outlined in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Legionella Environmental Assessment Form, dated June 2015, showed: -On page three, obtain a written copy of the program policy. -On page five, does the facility monitor incoming water parameters (e.g., residual disinfectant, temperature, pH)? -Page 14, is there a standard operating procedure (SOP) for shutting down, isolating, and refilling/flushing for water service areas that have been subjected to repair and/or construction interruptions. Record review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Safety and Oversight (QSO), dated 6/2/17 and revised on 7/6/18, 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 before2023-01-13 · tag F0568 — isolatedProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain a signature from (or maintain a paper receipt) for one discharged sampled resident (Resident #90) when he/she withdrew money at the time of his/her discharge and to prevent the existence of a negative balance for one sampled resident (Resident #31) for 41 days. This practice affected two residents out of six residents selected for the resident fund review. The facility census was 41 residents. 1. Record review of Resident #90's Face Sheet showed he/she was discharged to another facility on 7/20/22 with his/her return not anticipated. Record review of the Resident's Trust Fund Statement dated 7/1/22 through 9/30/22 showed a check was disbursed to the resident on 7/19/222 for $65.02. During an interview on 1/10/23 at 10:23 A.M., the Business Office Manager (BOM) said he/she: -Made a money order for that resident, but he/she did not have record for the money order. -Did not have a signature on any papers that the resident signed when he/she withdrew the $65.02. 2. Record review of Resident #31's trust transaction…
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 · D2023-01-13 · 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 protect two severely cognitively impaired residents (Resident #26 and #34) from physical and sexual abuse, when Resident #34 hit Resident #26 on or about 12/14/22 causing pain and a raised area on his/her head, and to assess severely cognitively impaired residents for the capacity and ability to consent to consensual sexual expression, when Resident #34 was found kissing and fondling Resident #26 on 10/31/22 and when Resident #34 was found unclothed in Resident #26's bed attempting to have sexual intercourse on 1/6/23. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revised on April 2021 showed: -Residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse. -Establish and maintain a culture of compassion and caring for all residents and particularly those 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 · D2023-01-13 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 investigate and/or report the findings of an investigation of resident to resident physical and sexual abuse between two severely cognitively impaired residents after one supplemental resident (Resident #34) hit another sampled resident (Resident #26) with a bag of coins leaving a knot on his/her head on 12/14/22, and after staff found Resident #34 kissing and touching Resident #26 in an inappropriate sexual manner on 10/31/22 and staff found Resident #26 unclothed from the waist down on top of Resident #34 unclothed from the waist down in bed attempting to have sexual intercourse on 1/6/23, out of 14 sampled residents and nine supplemental residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revised on April 2021 showed: -Residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-13 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 investigate a resident to resident physical and sexual abuse between two severely cognitively impaired residents after one supplemental sampled resident (Resident #34) hit one sampled resident (Resident #26) on 12/14/22 causing a knot on his/her head, and after staff found Resident #34 kissing and touching Resident #26 in an inappropriate sexual manner on 10/31/22 and after staff found Resident #26 unclothed from the waist down on top of Resident #34 unclothed from the waist down in bed attempting to have sexual intercourse on 1/6/23, out of 14 sampled residents and nine supplemental residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revised on April 2021 showed: -Residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from verbal, mental, sexual or physical…
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 · D2023-01-13 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 accuracy of a baseline care plan for one sampled resident (Resident #240) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility's policy, dated December 2016, titled Care Plans-Baseline showed: -The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) was to review the physician's orders, including medication and treatments, in developing the baseline care plan. -The IDT was to gather information from the resident and their representative that included any services or treatments necessary. 1. Record review of Resident #240's face sheet showed he/she was admitted with the following diagnoses: -Sleep Apnea (a potentially serious sleep disorder in which breathing repeatedly stops and starts). -Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD a chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs). -Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia (when you do not have enough oxygen in your blood). Record review of the resident's Baseline Care Plan Summary, dated 1/7/23…
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 · D2023-01-13 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan addressed oxygen usage for one sampled resident (Resident #5) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility's policy, dated April 2009, titled Goals and Objectives, Care Plans showed: -Staff were to include specific resident problems. -Staff were to enter goals and objectives on the resident's care plans so that all disciplines had access to such information. 1. Record review of Resident #5's face sheet showed he/she was admitted with a diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD - a disease process that decreases the ability of the lungs to perform ventilation). Record review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 10/20/22 showed Oxygen use was not marked. Record review of the resident's care plan, dated 12/7/22, showed: -Staff did not address difficulty breathing. -Staff did not address oxygen use. Record review…
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 · D2023-01-13 · 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 physician's orders for Hospice services (end of life care) were documented on the Physician's Order Sheet (POS) for two sampled residents (Resident #12 and #35) and to ensure the care plan showed the coordination of services and interventions between Hospice and the facility for one sampled resident (Resident #12) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility Hospice and Palliative Care policy and procedure dated July 2017, showed the facility had an agreement with Hospice to ensure that residents who wish to participate in a Hospice program may do so. Procedures showed: -It is the responsibility of the Hospice to manage the resident's care as it relates to terminal illness and determining the Hospice plan of care. -It is the facility's responsibility to meet the residents personal care and nursing needs in coordination with Hospice and ensure the level of care provided 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 · D2023-01-13 · 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 reassess smoking safety for one sampled resident (Resident #5) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility's policy, dated July 2017, titled Smoking Policy-Residents showed a resident's ability to smoke safely would be reevaluated quarterly, upon a significant change, and as determined by staff. 1. Record review of Resident #5's face sheet showed he/she was admitted with the following diagnoses: -Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD - a disease process that decreases the ability of the lungs to perform ventilation). -Muscle spasm (muscle involuntary and forcibly contracts uncontrollably and can't relax). Record review of the resident's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 2/4/22 showed: -The resident scored a 10 on his/her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicated he/she was…
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 · D2023-01-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were accurate, complete, and followed for three sampled residents (Resident #5, Resident #240 and Resident #22) who utilized oxygen and a bilevel positive airway pressure machine (BiPAP, uses two settings with one for inhaling and one for exhaling), and to properly store oxygen equipment when not in use for two sampled residents (Resident #240, Resident #22) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility's policy, dated November 2014, titled Medication Orders showed staff were to record orders for oxygen with the rate of flow, route, and rationale. Record review of the facility's policy, dated April 2019, titled Administering Medications showed: -Staff were to check three times to verify he/she had the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time, and right method of administration before giving a medication. -Staff were to record in the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-13 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
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 ongoing reassessment for behavioral management, to ensure the residents were free from potential inappropriate sexual and physically aggressive behaviors when implementing and re-evaluating interventions, to document the outcomes of preventive measure for effectiveness, and to prevent further occurrences of inappropriate physically aggressive and sexually inappropriate behaviors for two severely cognitively impaired residents, one sampled resident (Resident #26) and one supplemental resident (Resident #34) who were found by facility staff engaged in sexual activity on 10/31/22, 11/12/22 and 1/6/23, and an aggressive or inappropriate behavioral incident on 12/14/22, resulting in Resident #34 hitting Resident #26 on top of head with a bag of change causing Resident #26 to have a painful raised area on his/her head, out 14 sampled residents and nine supplemental residents. The facility census was 41 residents. A policy related to behavior…
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 before2023-01-13 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
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 food containers in the resident use refrigerator, were labeled with the resident 's name and the date it was received and to prevent the storage of staff's food in the resident use refrigerator. This practice potentially affected at least five residents who allowed their food to be stored in the refrigerator. The facility census was 41 residents. Record review of the facility's policy entitled Foods Brought by Family/Visitors, dated 10/2017, showed: - Food brought by family/visitors that is left with the resident to consume later will be labeled and stored in a manner that is clearly distinguishable form facility prepared food. - Non-perishable foods will be stored in resealable containers with tight fitting lids. Intact fresh fruit may be stored without a lid. - Perishable foods must be stored in resealable containers with tightly fitting lids in a refrigerator. - Containers will be labeled with the resident's name, the item and the use by date. 1. Observation of the resident use refrigerator on 1/9/23…
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 · D2020-11-13 · tag F0563 — failed to protect the right to visitors — isolatedHonor the resident's right to receive visitors of his or her choosing, at the time of his or her choosing.
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 develop a policy regarding hospice (end of life care) visits and to allow hospice visits for two sampled residents (Residents #24 and #3) out of two residents sampled for hospice services. The facility identified four residents on hospice. The facility census was 30 residents. Record review of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Quality Safety & Oversight (QSO)-20-39-NH dated 9/17/20 titled Nursing Home Visitation Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19 - a new disease caused by a novel (new) coronavirus) showed when core infection control practices are used and testing requirements are met, health care workers who are not employees of the facility but provide direct care to the facility's residents, such as hospice workers, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel, dialysis technicians, laboratory technicians, radiology technicians, social workers, clergy etc., must be permitted to come into the facility as long as they are not subject to a work exclusion…
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 · D2020-11-13 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 utilize the required format of the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services form (CMS)-10055) and Notice of Medicare Provider Non-Coverage (NOMNC) (form CMS-10123) for two sampled residents (Residents #83 and #84) out of two sampled residents who were discharged from Medicare part A (insurance that covers inpatient hospital care, skilled nursing facility, lab tests, surgery, home health care for individuals who are [AGE] years of age and above or disabled) services. The facility identified two residents who required beneficiary notices over the past six months. The facility census was 30 residents. No policy was received from the facility. Record review of the form and the instructions for the SNF ABN CMS form 10055 showed: -The SNF ABN form is a CMS-approved model notice and should be replicated as closely as possible when used as a mandatory notice. -Entries in the blanks may be typed…
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 · D2020-11-13 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop 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 check the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Registry to ensure individuals did not have a Federal Indicator (a marker given by the federal government to individuals who have committed abuse/neglect) and check the Employee Disqualification List (EDL) (a marker given to individuals who have committed crimes against residents in long term care settings) for two sampled employees (Employee #4 and #5) out of eight sampled employees hired since the last annual survey. The facility census was 30 residents. Record review of facility undated policy titled, Abuse Prevention Program, showed: -Facility policy requires employee background checks as a part of their abuse prevention program. -Employees are required to have backgriund checks prior to employment. Requested facility policies for criminal background checks and employee disqualification list and these policies were not received at time of exit. 1. Record review of Employee #4's file showed: -He/she was hired on 10/05/20. -There was no record of the Criminal Background Check…
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 before2020-11-13 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to update the residents' care plans for two sampled residents (Resident #24's and #19) out of 12 sampled residents. The census was 30 residents. The facility did not provide a policy regarding updating care plans. 1. Record review of Resident #24's nurse's note dated 8/26/20 showed: -At approximately 6:20 A.M., the resident spilled hot chocolate on his/her right hand and both thighs. -The resident's right hand was swollen and appeared to have first degree burn (affects only the outer layer of skin and appears red with no blisters). -Both thighs were red. Record review of the resident's care plan for admission date of 3/4/20 showed an update on 8/26/20 that showed the resident spilled hot chocolate on his/her thighs but the update did not include any interventions. Record review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 9/19/20 showed 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.
“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 MO OP HOLDCO, LLC — 9 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 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| LICHTENSTEIN, ELI | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
| LICHTENSTEIN, ISAAC | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
| MANDELBAUM, CHAIM | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
| HOLDEN MANOR PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
| CICERO, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/03/2024 |
| HUFFMAN, CHRISTINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/07/2025 |
| KRAMER, SHMUEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 7 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.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $128K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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 265739. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-08-02, 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.