Gasconade Manor Nursing Home
1910 Nursing Home Road,, Owensville, MO 65066 · Non profit - Other · 79 certified beds · (573) 437-4101 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has 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 a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (21) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 4 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 | 13.8% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 5.3% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 5.9% | 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 | 2.1% | 4.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.8% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 36.6% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.5% | 90.9% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.1% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 4.2% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.7% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 19.0% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 4.4% | 26.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 4.6% | 13.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.89 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.32 | 2.33 | 1.80 | better |
* 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.
52.0% 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 46 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 52.4% 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 21 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.
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 | 52.0%CMS range 40.3–63.2 | 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 | 15.5%CMS range 10.5–21.5 | 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 | 52.4% | 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 | 42.9% | 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 | 57.1% | 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 | 88.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.78 | 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
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
21 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to use Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) (an infection control practice that requires staff to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (gowns, gloves and/or eye protection), and failed to use appropriate hand hygiene and glove use for five residents (Residents #5, #6, #8, #34, and #42) out of 18 sampled while performing catheter care, wound care, and mechanical lift transfers. The facility census was 61. 1. Review of the facility policy titled Policy for Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 04/01/24, showed the facility will implement EBP beginning April 1, 2024, and EBP is designed to reduce the transmission of Multi-Drug-Resistant Organisms (MDROs), a germ that is resistant to many antibiotics, throughout the facility. Residents will be identified for EBP if they meet the following criteria: known infection or colonization with a resistant organism; indwelling medical devices including urinary catheter, central line, feeding tube,…
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 before2025-07-31 · 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 record review and interview, facility staff failed implement the facility's policy by not checking the Employee Disqualification List (EDL) quarterly for six staff (Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) T, Housekeeper U, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) N, Dietary Aide (DA) V, Registered Nurse (RN) W and Certified Medication Technician (CMT) P) of 10 sampled staff. The facility census was 61.1. Review of the facility's policy titled Employee Disqualification List Protocol, dated 06/17/24, instructed staff to complete quarterly re-checks, they must review new EDL listings to ensure no current employees are disqualified. 2. Review of CNA T's employee file showed a quarterly EDL check had not been completed since his/her hire date of 02/15/25. 3. Review of Housekeeper U's employee file showed a quarterly EDL check had not been completed since his/her hire date of 09/03/24. 4. Review of LPN N's employee file showed a quarterly EDL check had not been completed since his/her hire date 10/24/24. 5. Review of DA V's employee file showed a quarterly EDL check had not been completed since his/her…
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 · E2025-07-31 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — patternRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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, facility staff failed to conduct inspections of bedrails as a part of regular maintenance program for one resident (#57) and failed to remeasure and reassess all possible entrapment zones for three residents (Resident #2, #8, #9) out of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 61. Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to conduct inspections of bedrails as a part of regular maintenance program for one resident (#57) and failed to remeasure and reassess all possible entrapment zones for three residents (Resident #2, #8, #9) out of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 61. 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Adaptive Equipment Assessment Policy and Procedures, undated, showed:-The purpose is to prevent, identify, and appropriately respond to entrapment hazards in beds and equipment used by residents;-Risk of using adaptive equipment is a resident may attempt to get out of bed unsafely resulting in injury 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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide written information to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the bed hold policy at the time of transfer to the hospital for three residents (Resident #6, #38, and #57) out of 17 residents sampled. The facility census was 61.1. Review of the facility's policy titled Bed Hold Policy, dated 10/17/23, showed in the event a resident leaves the facility for hospitalization, a charge will not be calculated with anticipated return. 2. Review of Resident #6's medical record showed staff documented the resident discharged from the facility on 04/04/25 to the hospital and returned on 04/10/25. The medical record did not contain documentation staff issued a bed hold upon discharge to the resident or the resident's responsible party, and did not notify the ombudsman of the transfer/discharge. 3. Review of Resident #38's medical record showed staff documented the resident discharged from the facility on 06/12/25 to the hospital and returned on 06/16/25. The medical record did not contain documentation that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to ensure multi-dose medications were dated when opened in one out of two medication storage carts. The facility census was 61.1. Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Protocol, undated, showed facility staff were directed daily to label/record date when stock medication is opened and check for expired medications.2. Observation on 07/28/25 at 10:28 A.M., showed the 200-hall medication cart contained:-One bottle of Sodium Chloride 1 gram (gm) (used for electrolyte replenisher) opened and undated;-One bottle of Fluticasone Propionate 500 micrograms (mcg) nasal spray (used for allergies) opened and undated;-One bottle of Equate eye itch relief drops, opened and undated;-One bottle of 0.25% Acetic Acid 1,000 milliliter (ml) bottle (used for urinary irrigation) opened and undated;-One bottle of ABC complete vitamin, opened and undated;-One bottle of Vitamin C 500 milligrams (mg, opened and undated;-One bottle of Vitamin D 2000 mg, opened and undated;-One bottle of Vitamin B12 500 mcg, opened 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 before2024-05-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility staff failed to maintain the mechanical dishwasher in good repair to ensure dishes were effectively washed and sanitized to prevent cross-contamination. This failure has the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 61. 1. Observation on 05/28/24 at 10:35 A.M., showed the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) washed a rack of soiled cups in the chemical sanitizing mechanical dishwasher.Observation showed the CDM did not check the temperature of the dishwasher during the cycle. Observation showed the gauge of the dishwasher registered the water temperature during the wash cycle as 110 degrees Fahrenheit (dF) and the water temperature of the rinse cycle registered 112 dF. Observation showed when the dishwasher cycle finished, the CDM removed the rack of cups to the clean side of the station to dry and then loaded another rack of soiled dishes into the machine to wash. Observation showed the gauge of the dishwasher registered the temperature during 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 · E2024-05-31 · 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
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet the residents' interest on the weekends for two residents (#3 and #54) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 61. 1. Review of the facilities policy titled, Resident acitvity policy, undated, states activities refer to an endeavor, other than routine Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) in which a resident participates that is intended to enhance his/her sense of well-being and to promote physical, cognitive, emotional health. The certified Activity Director (AD) completes an Activity Assessment within 72 hours of resident admission in order to implement an effective daily activity program meeting their physical, cognitive social, spiritual, educational, and recreational needs with options essential for preserving and enhancing resident's sense of well-being. 2. Review of the facilities Activity Calander, dated May 2024, showed: -Saturday, 05/04/2024, library, music room, pool table, streaming service in the activity oom and use gaming console;…
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 · E2024-05-31 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% out of 25 opportunities observed, two errors occurred, resulting in a 8% error rate, which affected one resident (Residents #2) of 11 sampled residents. The facility census was 61. 1. Review of the facility's, Insulin Administration Policy, not dated, showed if using an insulin pen, prime needle with two units prior to dialing to the amount of insulin. Review of Resident #2's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 04/09/24, showed staff documented the resident diagnosis of Diabetes and received insulin injections seven days of the seven days in the look back period. Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 05/01/24, showed Humalog Kwik Pen (Insulin Lispro) 100 Units/milliliter (ml) per sliding scale three times a day. Review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated 05/01/24, showed staff documented the following medication administrations: -05/30/24, five units before lunch;…
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 before2023-02-24 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility staff failed to store food in a manner to prevent potential contamination and out-dated use. Facility staff failed to use food in a first in-first out method when facility staff opened multiple containers of the same food item for use. Facility staff also failed to wear hair restraints to protect food and food-contact surfaces from potential contamination. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Food Storage policy, dated 11/01/17, showed the policy directed staff to store food obtained for use by the facility for consumption by the residents properly in the kitchens and the refrigerators and freezers are to be maintained by the dietary staff. Review of the facility's Label and Dating policy, dated 11/01/17, showed Any food prepared and stored for later use or partially opened food items must be clearly identified. If the original packaging is not still intact the label must include what the product is and dated with day item…
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 before2023-02-24 · 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 record review and interview, the facility staff failed to follow their policy to ensure they completed the required Nurse Aide (NA) Registry (a registry that is a list of individuals who had a previous incident involving abuse, neglect, or misappropriation of property) check in accordance with their policy prior to start date for 10 employees (Maintenance Worker L, Dietary Aid (DA) M, Housekeeping Aid N, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) O, LPN P, Certified Medical Technician (CMT) E, CMT A, Environmental Aid Q, NA R and Human Resource Director) out of 10 sampled employees. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Abuse/Neglect policy, undated, showed: - The facility will not hire or maintain in employment a person with a history of abuse and will report any employee known to be abusive to the appropriate authorities; -The nurse aid registry will be checked prior to employment for each state where a nurse aid has shown to have worked, or has listed certification. Nurse aides will not be hired whose name is on any state abuse registry; -Verification of background…
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 11 citations
- Potential for harm · E2023-02-24 · 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, facility staff failed to provide the necessary care and services to maintain good personal hygiene for three sampled residents (Residents #4, #15, and #39) that were unable to perform their own activities of daily living (ADL), and failed to answer call lights in a timely manner for one resident (Resident #28). The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Bath and Shower policy, dated 10/10/22 showed: -It is the policy of the facility to allow residents their choice with their bath/shower regimen and schedule; -Resident are allowed to choose their preferred time of their bath/shower; -Residents will be bathed/showered minimally twice per week; -Residents have the right to request more showers/baths as they feel needed. 2. Review of Resident #4's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 12/7/22, showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Severe cognitive impairment; -Required extensive assistance from two staff…
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 before2023-02-24 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, when staff failed maintain a clean blood glucose meter (device used to obtain a blood sugar reading) between residents (Resident #15, #4, and #13). The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Blood Glucose Monitoring Device Care policy, undated, showed: -It is the mission of the facility to prevent transmission of pathogens through blood glucose monitoring devices; -Blood glucose monitoring devices must be disinfected by staff with hydrogen peroxide and/or Clorox wipes before and after each use; -Blood glucose monitoring devices are to be placed in a caddy and carried into the resident room; -The caddy is to be cleansed with hydrogen peroxide and/or Clorox wipes between resident's rooms; -If the caddy is placed on a hard surface, that area must be cleansed with hydrogen peroxide wipes after removal of caddy prior to leaving resident's room.…
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 · E2023-02-24 · tag F0882 — patternDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one or more individuals completed specialized training in infection prevention and control (IPC) prior to assuming the role of infection preventionist (IP) for the facility's infection prevention and control program. The census was 60. 1. Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website showed: -The Nursing Home Infection Preventionist Training course is designed for individuals responsible for infection prevention and control (IPC) programs in nursing homes; -The course is made up of 23 modules and sub-modules that can be completed in any order and over multiple sessions. Review of the IP's CDC training transcript showed three modules were completed in January 2022 and seven modules in May 2022. Further review showed no additional modules had been completed since May 2022. During an interview on 2/22/23 at 12:57 P.M., the IP said he/she started as the IP in May of 2022 and had completed the CDC online course. During an interview on 2/23/23 at 8:31 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-02-24 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to maintain and follow current guidance and procedures for immunizations of residents against pneumococcal (infection caused by bacteria) pneumonia in accordance with national standards of practice for three (Residents #19, #40 and #47) of seven sampled residents. The facility also failed to ensure Resident #51 was offered the flu vaccine. The facility census was 61. 1. Review of the facility's Influenza/pneumococcal vaccination policy, last reviewed October 2022 showed: -All residents of the facility may receive an annual influenza vaccination and pneumococcal vaccination if needed, if not allergic to eggs and with resident or responsible party consent -Consent for vaccination(s) to be obtained on yearly basis and upon admission -Once resident has received either influenza or pneumococcal vaccination nursing staff will document regarding injection site and any adverse reactions for 24 hours. Review of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services -…
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.
- No harm found · C2024-05-31 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost 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, facility staff failed to post the required nurse staffing information in an easily accessible place for residents and visitors, and failed to include the required data in the posting. The facility census was 61. 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Posted Nursing Data, dated 10/23/23, showed per state and federal guidelines, it is the policy of the facility that the day charge nurse post the following data on a daily basis located at the skilled nurses station area: Facility name, current date, census, number of Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed Piratical Nurses (LPN), and Certified Nurse Aides (CNA). Observation on 05/30/24 at 2:00 P.M., showed the nurse staff posting at the nurse's desk behind a locked door, not easily accessible to residents and visitors. Review showed the nurse posting did not contain the facility name, resident census, or the total hours worked for direct care nursing staff. Observation on 05/31/24 at 9:49 A.M., showed the nurse staff posting at the nurse's desk behind a locked door, not easily accessible…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-02-24 · tag F0575 — widespreadPost a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to post the telephone number for the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) Adult Abuse and Neglect Hotline (used to report allegations of abuse and neglect) in a form and manner accessible to all residents and visitors on the rehabilitation unit. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the policies provided by the facility showed they did not contain a policy for the required postings. Observations from 2/20/23 at 10:00 A.M. through 2/23/23 at 1:00 P.M., showed the facility did not post the name, address, and toll free telephone number for the Adult Abuse and Neglect Hotline in an accessible location for residents or visitors to use if needed on the rehabilitation unit. During an interview on 2/23/23 at 9:11 A.M., Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) F said he/she did not know if the Adult Abuse and Neglect Hotline information was posted anywhere in the facility for the residents. He/She did not know the number and said would not know what to do to find it. During an interview on 2/23/23 at 10:27 A.M.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2023-02-24 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to ensure the most recent survey results were posted and readily accessible to residents, family member or representatives of residents. This has the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Resident Rights policy showed the policy did not include information on survey results. Observation on 2/20/23 at 11:00 A.M., showed a table in the entrance of the facility with a sign pointing down with the words last years survey results printed on it. The table did not contain the survey results. Observation on 2/23/23 at 1:00 A.M., showed a table in the entrance of the facility with a sign pointing down with the words last years survey results printed on it. The table did not contain the survey results. During an interview on 2/21/23 at 10:00 A.M., the resident council said they did not know where the past survey results were posted. During an interview on 2/23/23 at 9:00 A.M., the Director Of Nursing said past survey results should be kept in binder in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2023-02-24 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — widespreadHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to maintain evidence demonstrating the results of all grievances for a period of no less than three years. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Grievance policy, undated, showed staff were directed as follows: - The grievance officer is responsible for ensuring that all grievances include; - The date the grievance was received; - A summary statement of the residents grievance; - The steps taken to investigate the grievance; - A summary of the pertinent findings or conclusions regarding the residents' concerns; - At statement as to whether the grievance was confirmed or not confirmed; - Any corrective action taken or to be taken by the facility as a result of the grievance; - The date the written decision was made. Review of facility records showed the record did not contain grievance reports for a period of no less than three years. During an interview on 2/21/23 at 10:00 A.M., the resident council members said they do not receive a written response or rationale to the grievances that are voiced and don't…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-02-24 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop an antibiotic stewardship program and a system to monitor appropriate antibiotic use. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Infection Control Program, undated, showed: -Infection Control Program includes: -Review of Monthly infection reports with corrective actions taken by facility if needed; -Antibiotic stewardship program. Review of the facility's Antibiotic Stewardship policy, undated showed: -The facility will implement and maintain an Antibiotic Stewardship Program with the mission to promote the appropriate use of antibiotics while optimizing the treatment of infections; -The facility Antibiotic Stewardship Program will incorporate all seven core elements including leadership, accountability, drug expertise, action to implement policies and practices, tracking measures, reporting data, education for physicians, nursing staff, residents and family about antibiotic resistance and opportunities for improvement; -The facility will have physicians, nursing, pharmacy and infection preventionist…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-02-24 · tag F0888 — widespreadEnsure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure 100% of staff were fully vaccinated for COVID-19 (a highly contagious virus that causes serious illness or death) or have been granted a qualifying exemption, or have a temporary delay as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for three staff members (Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) J, CNA T and Employee U) out of 107. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's COVID-19 Vaccination Policy, undated, showed: -When COVID-19 vaccine is available to the facility, each resident and staff member is offered the COVID-19 vaccine unless the immunization is medically contraindicated, or the resident or staff member has already been immunized; -The resident, resident's representative or staff member has the opportunity to accept or refuse a COVID-19 vaccine and change their decision; -The policy did not include a process by which staff may request an exemption from the staff COVID-19 vaccination requirements based on an 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.
- No harm found · B2023-02-24 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a system that assured a full and complete accounting of each resident's personal funds, for all residents that had funds entrusted to the facility on the resident's behalf. Staff failed to provide a description or written receipt for all transactions for two of five sampled residents (Resident #20 and #33) or their designees. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's policies showed staff did not provide a policy for resident funds. 2. Review of the Resident #20's monthly fund summary for November 2022 showed: -The resident had 50 dollars deposited in his/her envelope; -The resident had two envelope withdrawals totaling 50 dollars; -The summary did not provide dates for deposits or withdrawals; -The summary did not provide a description of the withdrawals. Review of the resident's monthly fund summary for December 2022 showed: -The resident had 50 dollars deposited in his/her envelope; -The resident had four envelope withdrawals totaling 50 dollars; -The summary did not provide dates…
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GASCONADE MANOR NURSING HOME DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 10/01/1993 |
| BOSSALLER, CYNTHIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 02/01/2025 |
| HESEMANN, LYNN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2009 |
| JETT, ROGER | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2016 |
| KEMPER, WAYNE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| THORTON, MARGIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2022 |
| POWERBACK REHABILITATION LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/15/2025 |
| RAY, CRYSTAL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/19/1994 |
| STROTHKAMP, ALEXUS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| WARBRITTON, DUSTIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2009 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/23/2020 |
| LEGENDS BANK | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/27/2020 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
4 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.
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 265546. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, 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.