Sunset Home
1201 S Polk, Maysville, MO 64469 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (816) 449-2158 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- 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 a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — 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)
- about 21% 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 | 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 improved from 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.8% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 17.7% | 5.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.9% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.9% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 18.5% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 10.5% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.9% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 27.5% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.6% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.1% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 15.0% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 41.9% | 23.5% | 17.1% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 31% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 1.22 | 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 60 beds and averages 27.9 residents a day — about 46% occupied, or roughly 32 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.10 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.18 on weekdays — 4% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.28 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% 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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-11-05 · 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 prevent one of the three sampled residents, (Resident #1) from accidents and hazards when Resident #1 eloped from the facility and was found by a nearby business laying on the ground. The resident was transported to the hospital and found to have fractured in his/her left arm. The facility census was 29. Review of the facility's Elopement Protocol, dated April 2006 showed:Elopement, for the purpose of these guidelines is defined as that situation where a resident with impaired decision-making ability, who is oblivious to his/her own safety needs, and therefore at risk for injury outside the confines of the facility, has left the facility without knowledge of staff. The definition of elopement does not include a resident who is at risk for elopement, but whose exit from the facility is known to staff who is responding to the exit. Furthermore, the definition of elopement does not include residents: who are not at risk for elopement due 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 before2025-07-23 · 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 ensure staff stored food in a sanitary manner and failed to maintain the kitchen in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 23.Review of the facility's Cleaning of Workspaces policy, dated May 2015 showed:-Walls, doors, vents and ceiling must be free from chipped and/or peeling paint and must be kept in good repair;-Walls, doors, vents and ceilings must be washed at least twice a year;-Heavily soiled surfaces must be cleaned more frequently;-Cabinets should be washed with detergent solution and warm water every week and more often if needed.Review of the facility's Storage of Food and Supplies, dated May 2025, showed:-Dry storage rooms must be neat and clean;-Open boxes are to effectively re-sealed;-Date food with open date and use by date;-Food is to be stored a minimum of six inches above the floor.Review of the facility's, General Dish Room Sanitation Policy, dated May 2015, showed:-Dish room work surfaces must be maintained in a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-23 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
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 there was a Registered Nurse (RN) providing services at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week consistently for the months of January, February, and March 2025. The facility census was 23.A facility staffing policy was requested and none was provided. Review of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report showed the facility is responsible for submitting staffing data through the PBJ .This data is available through facility's PBJ Staffing Data Report that can be obtained through CMS' survey system. This report must be utilized by surveyors on at least every recertification survey. The report contains information about overall direct care staffing levels as well as if an RN was onsite for 8 hours a day. Review of the facility's PBJ staffing report for 2025., showed for the months of January, February, and March of 2025- No RN Hours on, 01/01 (WE); 01/04 (SA); 01/05 (SU); 01/18 (SA); 01/19 (SU) 02/01 (SA); 02/02 (SU); 02/08 (SA); 02/09 (SU) 03/01 (SA); 03/02 (SU); 03/15 (SA); 03/16 (SU); 03/29 (SA);…
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 · E2025-07-23 · tag F0732 — patternPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to post the daily staffing sheets to included the amount of hours scheduled to work for both licensed and non-licensed nursing staff and additionally failed to have it in an area unobstructed from the public view. The facility census was 23. The facility did not have a policy regarding the posting of daily census and staffing sheets. Observation on 7/22/25 at 2:15 P.M., showed the daily census and staffing sheets were hung on a clip board on a wall and behind a decorative tall Christmas tree in the front lobby which was obstructing the view from the public to see the daily census and staffing sheets of the facility. Review of daily census and staffing sheets attached to the clip board on 7/22/25., showed for the months of June and July no staff hours were posted for licensed or non-licensed staff in view for the public to see. During an interview on 7/22/25 at 3:10 P.M the Administrator said, she new that the daily staffing and census sheets should be posted in view of the public and that the decorative Christmas…
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 · E2025-07-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to accurately label medication and to facilitate consideration of precautions and safe administration, when nursing staff failed to write the opened date on three insulin pens for two of the 12 sampled residents (Resident #6, #9) The facility census was 23.Review of the facilities Diabetic Infection Control policy, not dated, states:- All multiple dose insulin vials will be assigned to individual residents, labeled appropriately, and dated when opened. Review of NovoLog injection flexpen manufacture guidelines states:- The NovoLog(R) FlexPen(R) you are using should be thrownaway after 28 days, even if it still has insulin left in it. Review of instructions for use of Lantus prefilled pen states:- Only use the pen for up to 28 days after its first use. Throw awaythe LANTUS SoloStar pen you are using after 28 days, even if it stillhas insulin left in it. Review of instructions for Humalog KwikPen states:- The HUMALOG Pen should be thrown away after 28 days, even ifit still has insulin left in it. 1. 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 · D2025-07-23 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that all services being provided met professional standards of quality of care for one resident (Resident #3) out of the 12 sampled residents. When CMT A failed to clarify medication parameters of when to hold digoxin (an antiarrhythmic medication) if the resident's heart rate dropped below a certain number (standards of quality of care recommend holding this medication for a pulse rate of 60 or below), and additionally failed to clarify with the charge nurse if a dose of digoxin should be administered or held while the resident had a heart rate of 54 (normal heart rate for adults is 60-100 beats per minute); placing the resident at risk for negative impact to their safety and well-being. The facility census was 23. Review of the facilities medication administration policy date 02/07/2013 showed:For administration of digitalis/digoxin and other medication that alter pulse rate: count the pulse for one minute before administration of…
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 · F2024-08-14 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespreadEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide competency assessments in accordance with their facility assessment, when they failed to ensure 7 of 7 randomly selected nurse aides, had competency assessments at hire and every 6 months thereafter. This potentially effected all residents. The facility census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy for competency and education. Review of the Facility assessment dated [DATE] showed: -Competencies will be tested every 6 months and those indicated by star will be tested at hire, for nursing staff. -Person Centered Care -Activities of Daily Living* -Disaster Procedures* -Infection Control* -Medication Administration* -Wound Care* -Measurements* -Resident assessments and observations -Caring for residents with all forms of dementia* -Specialized care-such as catheter insertion (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine), colostomy care (an artificial opening in the stomach to drain feces), etc. -Caring for residents with mental and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-14 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a Registered Nurse (RN) for eight consecutive hours per day seven days a week. This deficiency had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy regarding RN coverage. Review of the facility staffing and time sheets showed no RN in the facility within a 24 hour time period on: -July: 20th and 21st. -August: 3rd and 4th. During an interview on 08/14/24 at 11:30 A.M. the Administrator said: -The facility had a waiver for RN coverage so she did not worry about not having a RN in the facility on those days. -There facility used two staffing agencies that provided RN coverage at times. -There was an add on-line for a RN. -There was a RN on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, either the Director of Nursing or a Corporate Nurse. -There is no care that requires a RN. -The facility did admit residents on Medicare services. -She filed for a waiver for RN coverage on June 24, 2024 and has not received approval from CMS to waive RN coverage.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-14 · 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, record review, and interview the facility failed to prepare and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when staff failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen, did not ensure refrigerator and freezer temperatures were checked daily, did not ensure proper function of dishwasher by testing and logging it daily, did not use sanitizer solution on kitchen food preparation surfaces, staff did not practice sanitary hand washing skills, and did not ensure proper storage and labeling of foods. Additionally the facility failed to ensure food temperatures were logged and measured during meal service and cooking. The facility census was 33. Review of facility policy, handwashing, dated May 2015, showed: -If using gloves, remove gloves; -Roll down paper towels; -Turn on water and run until warm; -Wet hands and forearms with warm water; -Lather hands with antiseptic soap; -Wash hands, give particular attention to the areas between fingers, around cuticles, and under fingernails; -Wash forearms well; -Rinse thoroughly with warm water,…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately show the residents' correct code status in the resident's medical record when the code status did not match in all areas of the resident's medical record. This affected two of the 12 sampled residents (Residents #185 and #28). The facility census was 33. Review of facility policy, Advance Directive, undated, showed: -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 about whether or not the resident has executed an advance…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to follow the written policy to check the Nurses Aide (NA) registry prior to hire for three of 5 sampled staff members. The facility census was 33. Review of the undated abuse and neglect policy showed: Before a prospective employee is allowed to work with the residents, a complete background check will be completed; The facility will not employ an individual who has a finding entered on the state nurse aide registry. 1. Review of Dietary Aide (DA) B personnel file showed the following: - He/She was hired 6/22/23 to work as a DA in the kitchen; - No completed NA registry check. 2. Review of Nurses Aide (NA) A's personnel fie showed the following: - He/She was hired 7/6/23 to work as an NA; - No completed NA registry check. 3. Review of the Director of Nurses (DON) personal file showed the following: - He/she was hired 4/17/23 to work as the DON; - No completed NA registry check. During an interview on 8/14/24 at 8:27 A.M. the administrator said: - The Business Office Manager (BOM) completes the NA registry checks prior to a…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0623 — patternProvide 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 interviews and record review the facility failed to document and provide two residents (Resident #13 and #14), with written notice of transfer when the residents were transferred to local hospitals. the facility census was 33. The facility staff did not provide a policy regarding transfers. 1. Review of Resident #13's quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS, a federally mandated assessment completed by the facility staff), dated 8/4/24 showed: - The resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment; - He/She required substantial assistance to get dressed, use the toilet and to bathe; - Diagnoses included: Bipolar disorder (mood swings that range from depression to very happy), Atrial Fibrillation ( a disorder in which the heart does not beat correctly), epilepsy (seizure disorder), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). During an interview on 8/12/24 at 9:55 A.M. the resident said: He/She was in the hospital after he/she fell around the beginning…
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 · E2024-08-14 · 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 interviews and record review the facility failed to document and provide two residents (Resident #13 and #14), with a notice of bed hold policy when the residents were transferred to local hospitals. The facility census was 33. Review of the undated bed hold policy showed: - All residents and guardians will be notified of bed hold guidelines; - Notification will be given upon admission and at the time of transfer to the hospital. 1. Review of Resident #13's quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS, a federally mandated assessment completed by the facility staff), dated 8/4/24 showed: - The resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment; - He/She required substantial assistance to get dressed, use the toilet and to bathe; - Diagnoses included: Bipolar disorder (mood swings that range from depression to very happy), Atrial Fibrillation ( a disorder in which the heart does not beat correctly), epilepsy (seizure disorder), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary…
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 before2024-08-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had complete, accurate and individualized care plans, to address the specific needs of the residents, for three of the 12 sampled residents (Residents #2, #20 #30,). The census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy on Care Plans. 1. Review of Resident #30's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS: a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff ) dated 7/30/24 showed: -Brief Interview of mental status (BIMS) of 15, indicated no cognitive loss -Set up assistance of staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs: activities done in a day to care for oneself) -Diagnoses of : Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD: A lung disease that causes breathing problems and restricted airflow.) Chronic Atrial Fibrillation (Afib: a heart condition that causes rapid, irregular heart beats) Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD:A disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after experiencing or witnessing a…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff developed and updated care plans consistent with resident's specific conditions and needs which affected one of 12 sampled residents (Resident #2). Additionally, the facility failed to conduct quarterly care plan meetings to discuss the residents plan of care. This deficient practice affected two of 12 sampled residents, (Resident #13 and #17). The facility census was 33. Review of the facility policy, MDS and Care Planning guidelines, dated September 2013, showed: -It was the policy of facility to use the most current guidelines for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services (CMS) regarding the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Resident assessment Instrument manual, any published interim RAI manual errata documents, and applicable federal guidelines as the authoritative guide for completion of MDS, CAAs, and resident care planning. 1. Review of Resident #2's Quarterly minimum data set (MDS), A federally mandated assessment tool…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide 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, interviews and record review the facility failed to provide meaningful activities for five of 12 sampled residents (Resident #17, #21, #2, #13, #20). The facility census was 33. Review of the undated activity policy said: - Activities services will plan, organize and carry out a program of activities to meet the individual needs of the residents; - The Activities Director (AD) plans and organizes individual activities and group activities; - A calendar of events will be posted on the activity bulletin board; - All staff are responsible to assist residents to the activity - The AD will develop an activity calendar to include a wide variety of activities to include spiritual, physical, emotional, cognitive, sensory, recreational, and work service related activities; - Activities will be planned for men and women and large and small groups. 1. Review of Resident #17's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment completed by the facility staff), dated 6/7/24 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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff obtained and followed complete and accurate physician orders for the administration of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP: a type of ventilator that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways open while you sleep) for one resident . Additionally, the facility failed to label, date and clean the CPAP machines for 2 residents (Resident #30 and Resident #28) and failed to label and date open containers of distilled water for use in the CPAP machines for one resident (Resident #28) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 33. Review of the undated facility provided policy on Oxygen Equipment Cleaning Guidelines showed: -Oxygen equipment will be cleaned to ensure safety in handling and administering oxygen. -Connectors must be cleaned after each resident use. Review of the undated facility provided policy CPAP Administration showed: -Check the physician orders for pressure setting and method of…
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 · E2024-08-14 · 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 staff failed to assess residents for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation and failed to ensure the bed's dimensions were appropriate for the residents size and weight, and additionally failed to complete quarterly assessments side rail and entrapment assessments (Resident #20, #13, #14, and #21), and failed to obtain a physician's order prior to installation (Resident #20, #13, and #14), failed to obtain informed consent (Resident #13, #14, and #21) for four of the 12 sampled residents (Resident #20, #13, #14, and #20). The facility census was 33. Review of facility policy, bed rails, undated, showed: -Once bed rail observation is completed, the facility will print the observation and review associated risks and benefits with the resident and/or resident representative. After review is complete, the resident and/or resident representative will sign the consent line and nurse will sign as well. -Develop a care plan that outlines…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — patternEnsure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two nurse aides (NA) completed a nurse aide training program within four months of his/her employment in the facility. The census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy on education and Certified Nurse Aide training. Review of the Facility Assessment, completed by facility staff, dated 6/27/24 showed: -Nursing staff must have a license/certification current and verifiable with the State of Missouri. NA's will be hired with the certainty they will be in a Certified Nursing Assistant class within 120 days. Review of employee files showed the following: -Nurse Aide (NA) A date of hire 7/6/2023 -no competency evaluation -Certification issued 5/24/2024 -NA B date of hire 3/14/2024 -no competency evaluation -no certification issued Review of the Missouri CNA Registry on 8/14/24 showed: -NA A certification was issued 5/24/24 -NA B was not found During an interview on 8/14/24 at 11:30 A.M. the Administrator said: - There were two NA's working in the facility and one that was certified in the last 90 days. -The 2 NA'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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct at least twelve hours of nurse aide in-service education per year, failed to provide nurse aide's annual individual performance review or evaluation, failed to provide the required annual competency of Dementia Care, and failed to implement a tracking system for monitoring training hours. This effected 5 of the 7 sampled nurse aides (Certified Nurse Aide; (CNA) E and CNA F) and had the potential to effect all staff and residents. The facility's census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy regarding staff education. Review of the Facility assessment dated [DATE] showed: -Competencies will be tested every 6 months and those indicated by star will be tested at hire, for nursing staff. -Person Centered Care -Activities of Daily Living* -Disaster Procedures* -Infection Control* -Medication Administration* -Wound Care* -Measurements* -Resident assessments and observations -Caring for residents with all forms of dementia* -Specialized…
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 · E2024-08-14 · 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 and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff served food to the residents that was palatable, attractive, and served at a safe and appetizing temperature when hot food was not served at an appetizing temperature for four of twelve sampled residents (Resident #2, #13, #21, and #185) . The facility had a census of 33. Review of facility policy, Food Temperatures, dated May 2015, included hot foods should be at least 120 degrees Fahrenheit when served to the resident. 1. Review of Resident #2's Quarterly minimum data set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff, dated 5/13/24, showed: -He/She had moderate cognitive impairment; -He/She had clear speech and was able to make-self understood and understand others; -He/She was dependent on a wheelchair and walker; -He/She required set up or clean up assistance with eating; -He/She was on a mechanically altered diet; -Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease (a progressive disorder that affects the nervous system…
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 · E2024-08-14 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility staff failed to ensure they had a back flow preventer device (a device used to keep toxins from backing up into the facility's potable water supply) on all shower hoses. The facility census was 31. 1. Observation on 8/13/24 at 1:13 P.M., showed the shower hose in the shower room across from room six did not have a back flow preventer. During an interview on 8/13/24 at 1:13 P.M., the Maintenance Supervisor said he did not know all shower hoses needed to have a back flow preventer device.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-14 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure they had an effective pest control program when the facility had gnats in the corridors and brown recluse spiders in the sprinkler riser room. The facility census was 31. 1. Review of the pest control logs showed no specific treatments for spiders or gnats. Observation on 8/13/24 at 2:43 P.M. showed the sprinkler riser room was a ten by ten by eight foot room. The room had at least five living spiders that moved around the room as the surveyor entered the room and at least a dozen dead spiders in various levels of decay (some were just the exoskeleton) also lay on the wall and floor. During an interview on 8/13/24 at 2:43 P.M. the Maintenance Supervisor said he did not think they had a specific routine for spiders in their pest control program. During an interview on 8/14/24 at 2:30 P.M., the Administrator said they did not currently have a specific target for spiders with their pest control company. She knew general sprays would not generally kill brown recluse spiders. She did not know living and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-14 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
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 conduct at least 12 hours of nurse aide in-service education per year, failed to provide the required annual competency of Dementia Care and other required training's,and failed to prove education was completed from indicators of the Quality Assurance meetings. This effected 5 of the 7 sampled nurse aides (Certified Nurse Aide; (CNA) F, G,E, D and NA A) and had the potential to effect all staff and residents. The facility's census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy for education. Review of the Facility assessment dated [DATE] showed: -Competencies will be tested every 6 months and those indicated by star will be tested at hire, for nursing staff. -Person Centered Care -Activities of Daily Living* -Disaster Procedures* -Infection Control* -Medication Administration* -Wound Care* -Measurements* -Resident assessments and observations -Caring for residents with all forms of dementia* -Specialized care-such as catheter insertion (a tube inserted…
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 · D2024-08-14 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
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 provide trauma informed care to one sampled resident (Resident #30) with a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD, a mental health condition that is triggered by a terrifying event). The facility census was 33. The facility did not provide a policy on Trauma Informed Care. Review of Resident #30's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS: a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff ) dated 7/30/24 showed: -Brief Interview of mental status (BIMS) of 15, indicated no cognitive loss -Set up assistance of staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs: activities done in a day to care for oneself) -Diagnoses of : Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD: A lung disease that causes breathing problems and restricted airflow.) Chronic Atrial Fibrillation (Afib: a heart condition that causes rapid, irregular heart beats) Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD:A disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after experiencing or witnessing a terrifying event.) Depression (a mood disorder…
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 · D2023-11-03 · 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 that one resident (Resident #1) out of sampled five residents, received necessary care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, or psychosocial well-being; when the facility staff failed to obtain further testing orders from the physician or send the resident for a medical evaluation until nine days after an unwitnessed fall, causing a delay in treatment for a right hip fracture. This resulted in the staff not treating the resident's pain appropriately and placing the resident at risk for further injury of the leg and hip when the facility staff continued to transfer the resident to and from chair to bed without ensuring professional standards of care were completed first. The facility census was 33. The facility did not provide a fall policy. The facility did not provided any in-servicing or training documentation regarding falls, 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 · F2023-01-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement their water management policy and procedures to reduce the risk of growth and spread of Legionella (bacteria that causes Legionnaires' disease, a serious type of pneumonia and did not review it annually. The facility also failed to ensure facility staff were informed on the facility's Water Management Plan. The facility was 35. Review of the CMS Quality Safety and Oversight (QSO), dated 6/2/17 and revised on 7/6/18, showed: - Facilities must have water management plans and documentation that, at a minimum, ensure each facility: Conducts a facility risk assessment to identify where Legionella (a [NAME] of pathogenic Gram-negative bacteria that includes the species L. pneumophila, causing legionellosis, all illnesses caused by Legionella, and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens (e.g. Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, Burkholderia, Stenotrophomonas, nontuberculous mycobacteria, and fungi) could grow and spread in the facility water system. - The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-19 · 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, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for all residents of the facility, when the staff did not keep rooms clean, floors throughout the building clean and in good repair, doors and walls in all the hallways and in resident rooms scuffed with missing paint, missing closet doors, and an overall un-cleanliness about the building which affected all of the facility's three residence halls, all common areas of the facility and outside around the entire building. The facility census was 35. The facility did not provide a policy regarding their daily cleaning check list or deep clean schedule, nor did the facility provide a policy regarding the stripping and waxing of facility floors, nor did the facility provide a policy on painting or repairs of the building or grounds maintenance. 1. Observations on 01/16/23 showed: -room [ROOM NUMBER], at 11:23 A.M. -multiple scratched areas on the wall behind the bed, -bedroom entry…
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 · E2023-01-19 · 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 record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 3 of 16 sampled residents who required staff assistance (Resident #16, #18, #35) received assistance with grooming, and one resident (Resident #16) received incontinence care in a timely manner. The facility census was 35. Review of the facility provided undated policy for A.M. Care (Early Morning Care) showed in part: -Purpose is to provide cleanliness, comfort and neatness. Review of the facility provided undated policy: Nails, Care Of (Fingers and Toes) showed in part: -To provide cleanliness, comfort, prevent the spread of infection. -The nurse assistants may perform nail care on the residents who are not at risk for complication of infection . Review of the facility provided undated policy: Perineal Care showed in part: -Purpose is to cleanse the perineum and prevent infection and odor. Review of facility provided undated Shower Sheet instructions showed: -Staff are to complete a shower sheet for each resident on their shower day whether…
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 · E2023-01-19 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 there was an adequate number of staff to perform duties to enhance the residents' quality of life when the facility offered no current restorative nursing program for any residents, and failed to have licensed nursing coverage 24 hours a day. This affects the health and wellbeing of every resident in the building. The facility census was 35. Review of the facility staffing on 1/6/23, showed: -No staffing policy was provided by the facility. Review of the facility restorative nursing schedule and resident list on 1/6/23, showed: - No residents actively engaged in any restorative nursing program in the facility. Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 4th Quarter PBJ Staffing Data Report as of 1/10/23 showed: - The facility failed to have licensed nursing coverage 24 hour/day on 7/2/22, 7/31/22, 8/14/22, and 9/24/22. - The facility failed to have RN coverage on 7/2/22, 7/3/22, 7/4/22, 7/9/22, 7/10/22, 7/16/22, 7/17/22, 7/23/22, 7/24/22, 7/30/22,7/31/22, 8/6/22, 8/7/22, 8/13/22, 8/14/22,…
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 before2023-01-19 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services [NAME] Report 1705D, and staffing record review, the facility failed to provide the services of a Registered Nurse (RN), other than the Director of Nursing (DON), for eight consecutive hours per day, seven days a week. This affected all the residents in the facility. The facility census was 35. The facility did not provide a policy for RN coverage. 1. Review of the facility's Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) report for Quarter 4 showed: - No RN hours in the month of July, 2022 on: - Saturday, 7/2; - Sunday, 7/3; - Monday, 7/4; - Saturday, 7/9; - Sunday, 7/10; - Saturday, 7/16 - Saturday, 7/23; - Sunday, 7/24; - Saturday, 7/30 - Sunday, 7/31. - No RN hours in the month of August, 2022 on: - Saturday, 8/6; - Sunday, 8/7; - Saturday, 8/13; - Sunday, 8/14; - Saturday 8/20; - Sunday, 8/21; - Saturday, 8/27; - Sunday, 8/28; During an interview on 1/6/23 at 1:38 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator said: - They have no waiver for the staffing requirement. - The facility should have an Registered Nurse (RN)…
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 before2023-01-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance to professional standards of food service safety when staff failed to fully date opened items, discard leftover timely and failed to ensure all areas of the kitchen and food storage areas remained clean. The facility census was 35. Review of facility policy regarding storage of dry food and supplies, dated May 2015 included: -Shelving is to be kept clean and free of rust and chipped paint -Open boxes are to be effectively re-resealed. -Bulk crackers, cereal, cookies, pasta, etc. are to be stored and properly labeled in sealed containers. -Food grade plastic bags are to be tightly closed after being opened. -Food should be dated when stocked after delivery. Review of facility policy on food safety requirements, specifically regarding food storage, dated May 2015 included: -All food items must be properly labeled and dated. -All foods will be considered as 'leftovers' unless in the original container with an expiration date. Observation of the kitchen area 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 · D2023-01-19 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 staff completed a Level II PASARR (a federally mandated screening process for individuals with serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability/developmental disability related diagnosis who apply or reside in Medicaid Certified beds in a nursing facility regardless of the source of payment.). This affected one of 12 sampled residents (Resident #22). The facility census was 35. 1. The facility did not provide a policy for completing Level I (Pre-admission Screening for Mental Illness/Mental Retardation or Related Condition) and Level II PASARRs. Review of Resident #22's Level I nursing facility pre-admission screening for mental illness/mental retardation or related conditions, dated 2/13/15, showed: -Section B. Level 1 screening criteria for serious mental illness: 1. Person shows signs or symptom of major mental disorder including anxiety, paranoia, loneliness, and irritability 2. Person has been diagnosed as having schizophrenia, paranoid type 3. Person has had serious problems in levels of…
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 before2023-01-19 · 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 staff developed, implemented and updated a comprehensive, person-centered care plan which affected one resident (Resident #4) by not addressing care resident preferences regarding personal care. The care plans were not written with person-specific goals with measurable objectives and times frames in order to evaluate the resident's progress towards obtaining his/her goals. The facility census was 35. Review of the facilities undated Comprehensive Care Plan Policy that was provided showed: - The purpose to provide an individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable goals and time frames specific to the resident's needs and choices. This will be completed to help the resident attain their highest practicable level of well-being and will be updated as needed to reflect challenges and strengths of the resident. 1. Review of resident # 4's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) a federally mandated assessment instrument, completed by facility staff, dated 11/10/22 showed: - Alert and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LINCOLN, JAMES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 05/01/2006 |
| LINCOLN, JUDY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | 50% | since 05/01/2006 |
| MOORE, BRENDA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 04/25/2022 |
| HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/2006 |
| LTC MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/13/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 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 $630K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% 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 265745. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-23, 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.