Point Lookout Nursing & Rehab
11103 Historic Hwy 165, Hollister, MO 65672 · For profit - Corporation · 130 certified beds · (417) 334-4105 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Jul 2025
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- about 24% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 2 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 | 30.2% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.8% | 5.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.3% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.5% | 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 | 4.0% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 19.5% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 50.4% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.0% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.1% | 17.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 29.6% | 23.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.8% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 72.0% | 63.5% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.1% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 23.0% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.18 | 2.11 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.04 | 2.33 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
54.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 44 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 43.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 23 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 16% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 54.7%CMS range 39.6–69.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.8%CMS range 5.9–15.3 | 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 | 43.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 34.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 56.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | 3.1% | 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 | 3.1% | 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 | 6.5%CMS range 3.0–12.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.79 | 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 130 beds and averages 93.2 residents a day — about 72% occupied, or roughly 37 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.59 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.31 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.77 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 2.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.75 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.12 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
33 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-11-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared and stored under sanitary conditions when potentially hazardous food was not thawed using sanitary methods; when staff failed to check the temperature of potentially hazardous and food was not kept at the proper temperature on the steam table; and when dietary staff failed serve food under sanitary conditions when dietary staff touched ready-to-eat food items with bare hands. This had the potential to affect all staff and residents in the facility. The facility census was 85.1.Review of the facility's policy titled, General Requirements of Basic Hazard Analysis (HAACP), dated 2005, showed the following:-All potentially hazardous foods should be kept at safe temperatures, 41 degrees Fahrenheit (F) of below for refrigerated items, or 0 degrees F of below for frozen items-Potentially hazardous foods have historically been involved in foodborne illness outbreaks. Some examples of potentially hazardous foods are eggs,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-01 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to make individual financial record available to the resident or resident representative through quarterly statements and upon request when facility staff failed to provide 5 residents (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) or their responsible party with reconciled quarterly resident trust fund statements. The facility census was 88.Review of the facility's policy titled, Guidelines for Maintaining the Resident Trust Fund Account, revised on 08/04/22, showed the following:-The facility will establish and maintain a system that assures full, complete and separate accountings of each resident's personal funds entrusted to the facility on the resident's behalf;-A separate statement will be maintained for each resident that will show every disbursement and every deposit made on the resident's behalf;-The electronic accounting system is to be used to record resident trust deposits, disbursements, distribute interest and print quarterly statements;-The resident 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 · E2025-07-01 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — patternProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the right of all residents to be free from misappropriation when resident personal funds of five residents (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, and # 5) were used to make multiple unauthorized purchases. A sample of residents was reviewed in a facility with a census of 88.Review of the facility's policy, Abuse, Neglect, and Misappropriation of Property, dated November 2017, showed the following:-Each resident will be free from verbal, mental, sexual, or physical abuse, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation, corporal punishment, or involuntary seclusion;-Residents will be protected from abuse, neglect, and harm while at the facility. Review of the facility's policy titled, Guidelines for Maintaining the Resident Trust Fund Account, revised on 08/04/22, showed the following:-This facility will establish and maintain a system that assures full, complete and separate accountings of each resident's personal funds entrusted to the facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-24 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
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 staff member employed as the Dietary Manager had the required certifications, education, or experience to meet the regulatory requirements. The facility census was 93. Review of the facility policy titled, Dietary Manager, dated 01/01/98, showed the following: -Minimum qualifications of high school diploma or GED equivalent; -Two years of experience in a supervisory capacity in related field; -Certified Dietary Manager. 1. During an interview on 10/21/24, at 10:05 A.M., the Dietary Manager said the following: -He/she had only been the manager for two years and had been a CNA/CMT previously; -He/she was not certified; -He/she was given a voucher to take a test, but that was four or so, administrators ago. He/she was not sure what happened to it; The administrator was supposed to let him/her know when he/she would get certified, but he/she had not heard anything. Review of facility records showed the facility did not provide documentation the Dietary Manager being certified as a dietary manager, food service…
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 before2024-10-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed keep food safe from potential contamination or bacterial growth at all times when staff failed to air dry dishese before storage. The facility census was 93. 1. Record review of the 1999 Food Code, issued by the Food and Drug Administration, showed the following information: -After cleaning and sanitizing, equipment and utensils shall be air-dried or used after adequate draining before contact with food. -Items must be allowed to drain and to air-dry before being stacked or stored. Stacking wet items such as pans prevents them from drying and may allow an environment where microorganisms can begin to grow. Record review of the facility's policy, Nutrition and Dining Services Manual, Section 8, dated April 2011, showed the following: -Items are to be air dried; -No moisture can be found on any stacked item. Observations on 10/21/24, at 10:05 A.M., showed the following: -Forty-seven tall, plastic drinking glasses, upside down, flat on a tray, still wet on the inside. The storage of the glasses prevent air movement…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-24 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed maintain a clean and comfortable environment when the facility staff failed to maintain all light fixtures, walls, floors, sinks, and ceilings in in the dining and kitchen areas clean and free of debris. The facility census was 93. Record review of the facility policy, Nutrition and Dining Services Manual, Section 10, dated April 2011, showed the following: -Specify days the cleaning schedule will be done; -Specify who is responsible to do the cleaning by shift and position; -Post the schedule prior to the beginning of each week; -The employee will initial in the column under the day the task is completed. 1. Observation on 10/21/24, at 10:00 A.M., of the main dining room showed the a light fixture above the serving counter covered in cobwebs. Observation on 10/21/24, at 10:05 A.M., of the kitchen showed the following: -The handwashing station not clean. Splash-marks remained from soap that looked like dried bubbles on the wall behind the sink. Debris, including hair and dirt, was located in and around the sink.…
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 before2024-10-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program when staff failed to read administered tuberculosis (TB - a disease caused by germs that are spread from person to person through the air) skin tests in a timely fashion, per standards of practice, for three employees (Dietary Aide (DA) A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B, and Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) C. Facility had a census of 93. Review of the facility policy titled, Tuberculosis Control, not dated, showed the following: -Provide a tuberculin skin test to all employees during pre-employment procedures unless a previous reaction greater than 10 millimeters is documented; -An initial two step tuberculin skin test will be given; -If the result of first tuberculin skin test is negative (a negative tuberculin skin test is any measurement between zero to nine millimeters), give the second tuberculin skin test ten days later; -The tuberculin skin test is to be read 48 to 72 hours after administered. Review of 19 CSR 20-20.100 Tuberculosis Testing for Residents…
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 · D2024-10-24 · 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN - form CMS-10055) or a denial letter at the initiation, reduction, or termination of Medicare Part A benefits for two resident (Resident #39 and #85) who remained in the facility after discharge from Medicare Part A services. The facility census was 93. Review of the Form Instructions Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN) Form CMS-10055 (2024), undated, provided as the facility's policy, showed the following: -The SNF ABN provided information to the patient so that she/he can decide whether or not to get the care that may not be paid for by Medicare and assume financial responsibility. SNF's must use the SNF ABN when applicable for SNF prospective payment system services (Medicare Part A); -It is important to note that the SNF ABN, CMS-10055, is only issued if the beneficiary intends to continue services and the SNF believes the services may not be covered under Medicare, SNF's will continue to use the ABN form…
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 · E2024-04-09 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide services per standards of practice when staff failed to provide ordered restorative nursing services for three residents (Resident #6, #7, and #8) and failed to care plan restorative services for one resident (Resident #7) out of four sampled residents. The facility census was 83. Review of the facility's Restorative Nursing Manual, undated, showed the following: -The Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) is an integral part of maximizing the daily restorative care process for the residents; -The RNP is a part of the logical step-down process in resident care; -A pro-active approach is necessary to prevent future negative outcomes; -It is the purpose of this facility to see that each resident receives, and the facility provides, the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care; -It is the entire staff'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 · E2024-04-09 · 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 food was served at a temperatures that were palatable and appetizing for five residents (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) who often ate in their rooms. The facility census was 83. Review of the facility policy titled, Food Temperatures, dated April 2011, showed the following: -Hot food should be at least 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F) when served to residents; -A test meal should be sent with the hall trays when there are food temperature complaints until the temperatures are at the appropriate levels; -Plate lowerators are functioning and turned on prior to the meal service according to manufacturer's direction; -Lowerators are not over-filled so that all items are being heated; -Food is not placed in the steam table more than 30 minutes before meal service; -Food is not held in warm ovens more than 30 minutes before meal service It is recommended that food not be hold on the steam table for longer than two hours. 1. Observation on…
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 23 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-07 · tag F0557 — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents were treated with dignity and respect when one staff (Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) A) provided cares to three residents (Residents #1, #2, and #3) in an unrespectful and undignified manner when the CNA rushed residents, raised his/her voice at residents, and spoke in a disrespectful tone of voice when answering the residents' call lights. The facility census was 89. Review of the facility policy Resident Rights, undated, showed each resident shall be treated with consideration, respect a full recognition of his/her dignity and individuality, including privacy in treatment and care of his/her personal needs. 1. Review of Resident #1's face sheet (document with admission information) showed the following: -admission date of 12/01/23; -Diagnoses included dementia (brain damaged by injury or disease which involves progressive impairments in memory, thinking, and behavior which negatively impacts a person's ability 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 · Fcited before2023-03-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to keep food safe from potential contamination when food items were not dated or labeled after opening, or were left open and exposed to absorb ice crystals and odors and when staff failed to keep the kitchen free of an accumulation of grime and debris. This had the potential to affect all residents who ate food from the kitchen. The facility census was 83. Record review of the US Food and Drug Administration policy, under the section of Food Labeling and Handling, currently updated 3/4/23, showed the following: -Facility staff must ensure their proper storage, keeping track of when to discard perishable foods and covering, labeling, and dating all foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer as indicated; -Food shall be stored in a safe manner (no open containers, without covers, spillage from one food item onto another, etc.) to prevent cross-contamination -Labeling, dating, and monitoring refrigerated food, including, but not limited to leftovers, so it is used by its use-by date, or frozen (where applicable)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-20 · 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 provide a clean and homelike environment when staff failed to replace/fix ceiling tiles damaged by a water leak for one resident (Resident #10), failed to repair damage on two residents' (Residents #8 and #72) bedroom walls, and failed to change ceiling tiles that were stained from water leaks in the resident hallways and dining rooms. The facility census was 83. The facility did not have a specific policy pertaining to the repair of walls or ceiling tiles. 1. Record review of Resident #10's face sheet (a brief resident profile) showed the following information: -admission date of 03/04/22; -Diagnoses included type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic nephropathy (damage to kidneys caused by diabetes), complication of amputation stump, bipolar disorder (mental health condition causing extreme mood swings), depression. Record review of the resident's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated comprehensive assessment instrument,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-20 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to give written information to the resident and/or resident's representative regarding the facility's bed hold policy for five residents (Residents #8, #12, #17, #69, and #83) who were transferred out to the hospital. The facility census was 83. Record review of the facility's Bed Hold Guidelines (undated), showed the following: -This facility will notify all residents and/or their representative of the bed hold guidelines. This notification shall be given on admission to the facility, at the time of transfer to the hospital and at the time of non-covered therapeutic leave; -If the resident or resident representative wants to hold the bed, a signed authorization must be obtained with each discharge. Signed authorization must be received within 24 hours of the discharge if it occurs during the week. Signed authorization must be received by the first business day following the discharge if it occurs on a weekend or holiday; -If the resident or 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 · E2023-03-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure facility staff provided two residents (Residents #8 and #79), who were unable to complete their own activities of daily living (ADL), the necessary care and services to maintain good personal hygiene, including showers and nail care, out of a sample size of 23. The facility census was 83. Record review showed the facility did not have a policy available for showers. Record review of the facility provided undated policy, title Nails, Care of (Fingers and Toes), showed the following information: -Purpose to provide cleanliness, comfort, and prevent spread of infection; -The nursing assistant may perform nail care on the residents who are not at risk for complications of infection; -The licensed nurse or podiatrist must perform nail care on residents suffering from diabetes or vascular disease; -Staff should prepare equipment; -Staff should soak the resident hands for five minutes in a basin of warm water; -Scrub nails gently 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 · E2023-03-20 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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 obtain physician's orders for bed rail use for two residents (Resident #46 and #69); failed to complete a risk/benefit review and document alternatives attempted prior to bed rail use for two resident's (Resident # 23 and Resident #46); failed to obtain informed consent prior to the use side rails for two resident's (Resident #23 and Resident #46); failed to address the use bed rails in residents' care plans for two residents (Residents #12 and #46); failed to conduct an initial safety gap check for five residents (Residents #12, #23, #36, #46, and #69); and failed to ensure staff conducted periodic safety rechecks of all bed rails in use. The facility census was 83. Record review of the (undated) facility policy, titled Bed Rail Policy, showed the following: -Bed rails are adjustable metal or rigid plastic bars that attach to the bed; -They are available in a variety of types, shapes, and sizes ranging from full to one-half, one-quarter,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to to use appropriate infection control procedures to prevent the spread of bacteria or other infectious causing contaminants when staff failed to use appropriate hand hygiene while completing medication administration for 7 residents (Residents #10, #23, #35, #51, #55, #66, and #69). The facility census was 83. 1. Record review of the facility policy, titled Medication Administration, dated 2/7/13, showed the following information: -Medications are given to benefit a resident's health as ordered by the physician; -Staff should bring the cart to the resident room; -Knock on the door before entering the room; -Introduce yourself, call resident by name, and check picture ID in the medication book; -Wash hands; -Read the label three times before administering the medication; -Administer medication; -Remain in the room while the resident takes the medication; -Return the medication cart to designated location when medication pass is completed.…
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 · D2023-03-20 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 promote resident self-determination when staff failed to provide routine baths or showers to one resident (Resident #10). The facility had a census of 83. The facility did not have a shower policy. 1. Record review of Resident #10's face sheet (a brief resident profile) showed the following information: -admitted on [DATE]; -Diagnoses included Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with diabetic nephropathy (damage to kidneys caused by diabetes), complication of amputation stump, bipolar disorder (mental health condition causing extreme mood swings), and depression. Record review of the resident's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated comprehensive assessment instrument, completed by facility staff, dated 03/12/2023, showed the following: -Cognitively intact; -Independent with transfers; -Required physical help with part of bathing activity. Record review of the resident's current care plan, last revised 03/15/2023, showed the following:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-20 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to give written transfer notice to the resident and/or resident's representative for two residents (Residents #17 and #69) who were transferred out to the hospital. The facility census was 83. Record review of the facility provided copy of the form letter being sent to a resident's responsible party, titled Emergency Transfer Notice, showed the following information: -The letter is to serve as your emergency notice of transfer from the facility due to the need for urgent medical care which cannot be met by the facility; -More information on the discharge process can be received from State Long Term Ombudsman and address and phone number listed; -The name and address of facility transferred to; -Phone number of the facility and administrator signature. Record review showed the facility did not provide a policy regarding emergency transfer notice to residents or resident representatives. 1. Record review of Resident #17's face sheet showed the following…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-20 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to notify and coordinate with the State-designated authority following newly evident or possible serious mental illness for one resident (Resident #70) who had a negative level one Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR-a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have a mental disorder or intellectual disability are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long-term care. The PASARR requires that all applicants to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility be evaluated for a serious mental disorder and/or intellectual disability and be offered the most appropriate integrated setting for their needs (in the community, a nursing facility, or acute care setting) and receive the services they need in those settings). The facility census was 83. Record review showed the facility did not provide a policy regarding PASARR requirements. 1. Record review of Resident #70's Level 1 Nursing Facility Pre-admission Screening for Mental…
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 before2023-03-20 · 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 revise the comprehensive care plan for three residents (Residents #24, #36, and #39) of 18 sampled residents to reflect the residents' current care needs. The facility census was 83. Record review of the facility policy, titled Care Plan Comprehensive, with no date, showed the following: -An individualized care plan team with input from the resident, family, and/or legal representative will develop and maintain comprehensive care plan for each resident that identifies the highest level of functioning the resident may be expected to attain; -A well-developed care plan will be oriented to: -Preventing avoidable declines in functioning or functional levels; -Managing risk factors to the extent possible or indicating the limits of such interventions; -Addressing ways to preserve and build upon residents strengths; -The interdisciplinary care plan team is responsible for the periodic review and updating of care plans: -When a significant…
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 · D2023-03-20 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 develop and implement an effective system to ensure a resident's choice of code status (the type of emergent treatment a person would or would not receive if their heart or breathing were to stop) was readily accessible to staff and documented consistently throughout the medical record for one resident (Resident #10). The facility census was 83. Record review of the (undated) facility policy titled, Advance Directive, showed the following: -The facility will respect advance directives in accordance with state law. -Upon admission of a resident to the facility, the social services designee will provide written information to the resident concerning his/her right to make decisions concerning medical care, including the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment, and the right to formulate an advance directive. -Upon admission of a resident, the social services designee will inquire of the resident and/or his/her family members, about the existence of any written advance directives. -Information…
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 · D2023-03-20 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 an ongoing program of meaningful activities based on residents' interests and abilities when the staff did not provide activities as scheduled and did not track attendance of activities to evaluate if activities needs were being met for two residents (Residents #10 and #13). The facility had a census of 83. Record review of the facility policy titled, Activity/Recreational Therapy Manual, last reviewed on 03/12, showed the following: -The purpose is for the facility to provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment, the interests and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. -To enhance the quality of the residents daily life; -The Activity Director will develop a monthly activity calendar based on the residents' needs and interests. -Group activities will be scheduled at times when the maximum number of residents can participate in a specific…
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 before2023-03-20 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 restorative nursing services to maintain or improve residents' functional status as directed by therapy for two residents (Resident's #39 and #13) out of 23 sampled residents. The facility census was 83. Record review of the (undated) facility policy titled, Criteria for Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA) program, a section of the Restorative Nursing Manual, showed the following information: -Referral to the RNA program may be made by nursing, Physical Therapy (PT), Occupational Therapy (OT), Speech Therapy (ST), and physician, as well as through the Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated assessment completed by staff) process, Certified Nurses Aide (CNA), and family/resident input; -Upon assessment by nursing, PT, OT, or ST, the referral to the RNA is made; -The nurse or therapist initiating the referral transfers the assessment information to the Restorative Nursing Treatment Plan; -An appropriate inservice or instruction…
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 · D2023-03-20 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain physician orders to discontinue the use and care of an indwelling catheter (a sterile tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) for one resident (Resident #36), failed to remove the catheter from the care plan and Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by staff), and failed to document accurately when they charted the changing of catheter as completed when the resident no longer had a catheter. A sample of 23 residents was selected for review in a facility with a census of 83. Record review of the facility undated policy, titled Physicians Orders showed the following: -The following information is provided to assist staff in recording physicians' orders: -Foley catheter orders should include: -Why it is needed; -Specify the size (example, #18 French Foley catheter to straight drain) and the frequency to change; -Catheter care specifics what is to be used or according to facility procedure.…
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 · D2023-03-20 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, facility staff failed to post required nurse staffing total hours and failed to include the resident census in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors on a daily basis at the beginning of each shift. The facility census was 83. Record review showed the facility did not provide a policy regarding posting staffing hours. 1. Observation on 3/12/23 at 5:00 P.M., showed the nurse staffing hours posted on the left side of the DON's office window, just inside the nurses station. The posting did not include the facility census and did not include the total staff hours worked. The postings included 3/12/23, 3/13/23, and 3/14/23 with names of staff scheduled. 2. Observation on 3/13/23 at 9:54 A.M., showed the nurse staffing hours posted on the left side of the DON's office window, just inside the nurses station. The posting did not include the facility census and did not include the total staff hours worked. The postings included 3/12/23, 3/13/23, and 3/14/23 with names of staff scheduled. 3. Observation on 3/14/23 at 2:00 P.M.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-20 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors when staff checked one resident's (Resident #23) blood glucose level and administered a sliding scale dose of insulin 40 minutes after the resident ate his/her meal. Staff also failed to prime the insulin pen and hold the insulin dose for six to 10 seconds at the site of administration as recommended by the manufacturer to ensure the resident received the full and correct dose of insulin. The facility census was 83. Record review of the (undated) facility policy, titled Diabetic Infection Control, showed the following: -Insulin injection pens are for single resident use; -The policy did not address timing of blood glucose checks or priming insulin pens before injection or holding insulin pens after injection. Record review of the website Medscape (medical reference website for healthcare professionals) showed the following information: -Typical times to check blood glucose levels…
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 before2019-12-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 restorative nursing services to maintain or improve residents' functional status as directed by therapy for four residents (Resident #31, Resident #42, Resident #48, and Resident #75) out of 21 sampled residents. The facility census was 103. Record review of the facility's policy titled, The Restorative Nursing (RNA) Program, dated May 2006, showed the following information: -The restorative nursing program is an integral part of maximizing the daily restorative care process for the residents; -The RNA program is a part of the logical step-down process in resident care; -A pro-active approach is necessary to prevent future negative outcomes; -It is the purpose of this facility to see that each resident receives and the facility provides the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care; -It 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 · Dcited before2019-12-12 · 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, record review, and interview the facility failed to update the care plan for one resident (Resident #58) when the resident returned from the hospital with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) intravenous (IV) line for infusion of antibiotics due to an osteomyelitis (a bone infection) and cellulitis (an infection of the tissue), out of a selected sample of 21 residents. The facility's census was 103. 1. Record review of Resident #58's quarterly minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff), dated 8/1/19, showed the following: -admitted on [DATE], re-entered from the hospital on 4/24/19; -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance of two or more staff with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene; -Functional limitation in range of motion to bilateral lower extremities; -Used a wheelchair for mobility; -Suprapubic catheter (a urinary catheter that is surgically placed through the abdominal wall…
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 · D2019-12-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to identify, assess, and monitor one resident's (Resident #53) pressure ulcer and failed to follow appropriate infection control measures when cleaning one resident's (Resident #40) multiple pressure ulcers and failed to measure on resident's (Resident #40) pressure ulcers, according to professional standards, in a selected sample of 21 resident's. The facility's census was 103. Record review of the facility's pressure ulcer policy, dated March 2015, included the following information: -Purpose: To prevent and treat further breakdown of pressure ulcers; -Treatment of pressure ulcers will vary depending on the orders of the attending physician. The nurse is responsible for carrying out the treatment as ordered by the attending physician and for implementing measure to prevent pressure ulcers; -Observe skin. Any persistent reddened area that remains after pressure is relieved is considered a high-risk area for pressure ulcer to begin; -Change…
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 · D2019-12-12 · 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 evaluate one resident with a history of falls (Resident #21) in a timely manner for the need of an assistive device when requested by the resident. The facility failed to assess and document one resident's (Resident #53) reported incident involving a mechanical lift. A sample of 21 residents was selected for review in a facility with a census of 103. Record review of the facility's policy titled Fall Precaution and Management and Guidelines, (undated) showed the following: -Objective to identify residents at significant risk of falls and provide for additional precautions to reduced or manage risk; -A resident will be placed on the fall precaution program when any of the following conditions exist: a. Fall risk assessment score on John Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool if 6 or greater, or as identified by the specific fall risk tool used; b. The resident is identified through use of the care area assessment (CAA) as requiring care…
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 · D2019-12-12 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain an agreement with a dialysis (a process of cleaning the blood by a special machine necessary when the kidneys are not able to filter the blood) provider, failed to obtain a physician's order for dialysis before the resident received dialysis, and failed to consistently send and complete a dialysis communication form for one resident (Resident #253) in a selected sample of 21 residents. The facility's census was 103. 1. Record review of the facility's Dialysis, Care of a Resident Receiving policy, dated March 2012, showed the following sections: -Care of the AV (arteriovenous) shunt/fistula/grafts (abnormal connection or passageway between an artery and a vein); -Care of a subclavian (major arteries of the upper thorax, below the collarbone) or femoral vein (a large vein in the thigh) catheter; -Checking the thrill sensation (the sensation like a vibration, caused by blood flowing through the fistula; the thrill indicates the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the record was accurate and complete when staff did not document a change of condition for one resident (Resident #58) when the resident's condition declined and facility staff sent the resident to the hospital where the resident was diagnosed with osteomyelitis (a bone infection) and cellulitis (an infection of the tissue) out of a selected sample of 21 residents were selected for review in a facility with a census of 103. 1. Record review of Resident #58's quarterly minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff), dated 8/1/19, showed the following: -admitted on [DATE], re-admitted to the facility from the hospital on 4/24/19; -Moderate cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance of two or more staff with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene; -Functional limitation in range of motion to bilateral lower extremities; -Wheelchair for mobility;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to JAMES & JUDY LINCOLN — 56 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 55 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 55; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N & R OF HOLLISTER, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/16/2003 |
| LINCOLN, JAMES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 50% | since 07/16/2003 |
| LINCOLN, JUDY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | 50% | since 07/16/2003 |
| BESTGEN, DEVAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/16/2022 |
| LTC MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/16/2003 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Missouri Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 265411. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.