Aspire Senior Living Poplar Bluff
3001 May Street, Poplar Bluff, MO 63901 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 83 certified beds · (573) 686-6999 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (64%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 18% 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) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 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 | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 2 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 | 30.3% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.3% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.5% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.9% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 6.7% | 18.5% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.6% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 56.3% | 17.4% | 16.1% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 45.0% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.7% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.4% | 17.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.3% | 23.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.6% | 26.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 25.5% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.06 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 4.67 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. 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.
42.0% 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 25 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.7% 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 35 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 40% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 42.0%CMS range 28.5–60.2 | 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 | 10.5%CMS range 6.8–15.8 | 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 | 25.7% | 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 | 25.7% | 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 | 25.7% | 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 | 85.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.57 | 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 83 beds and averages 51.0 residents a day — about 61% 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.57 is at or above 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.88 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-23 · 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, the facility failed to perform hand hygiene and change gloves during care for six residents (Residents #17, #32, #33, #35, #44, and #57) out of seven sampled residents, failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - precautions for use during high-contact resident care activities for residents infected with a multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO - microorganisms that are resistant to one or more classes of antimicrobial agents) or any resident who has a chronic wound and/or indwelling medical device) for three residents (Residents #4, #5, and #44) out of four sampled residents, failed to do annual tuberculosis (TB - infectious disease caused by the tubercle bacillus) screenings for three residents (Residents #5, #8, and #9) out of five sampled residents, and failed to keep hot water temperatures between 110 degrees Fahrenheit ( F) and 120 F to inhibit the growth of Legionella (bacteria that can be present in building water systems under ideal conditions 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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform residents and/or their responsible parties, in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care, when the facility failed to obtain written consent before beginning psychotropic medications (medications that affect the mind, emotions, and behavior) for five residents (Residents #4, #6, #18, #24, and #57) out of seven sampled residents. The facility census was 50. Review of the facility policy titled, Use of Psychotropic Medications, dated 10/01/25, showed: - Prior to initiating or increasing a psychotropic medication, the resident, family, and /or resident representative must be informed of the benefits, risks, and alternative for the medication; - The resident has the right to accept or decline the initiation on increase of a psychotropic medication; - The facility will document that the resident or resident representative was informed in advance of the risks and benefits of the proposed care, the treatment alternative or other options, and the preferred option to accept or decline in a format that facility deems…
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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an order for code status was consistently documented throughout the medical record for one resident (Resident #58) out of 15 sampled residents. The facility census was 50. Review of the facility's policy titled, Basic Life Support/Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR - an emergency procedure consisting of chest compressions if the heart stops beating or the person stops breathing), dated [DATE], showed:- Potential rescuers will initiate CPR, in addition to calling 911, unless a valid Do Not Resuscitate (DNR - does not want cardiopulmonary resuscitation) order is in place, obvious signs of irreversible death (e.g., rigor mortis, dependent lividity, decapitation, transection or decomposition) are present, or initiating CPR could cause injury or peril to the rescuer; - If a resident experiences a cardiac or respiratory arrest and the resident does not show obvious clinical signs of irreversible death (e.g. rigor mortis, dependent…
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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to issue a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) and/or a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) form to the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing at least two calendar days before discharge from skilled services. This notice informs the beneficiary about potential non-coverage services and the option to continue services with the beneficiary accepting the financial liability for those services. This practice affected one resident (Resident #29) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 50.Review of the facility policy titled, Advance Beneficiary Notices, dated 10/01/25, showed:- The Business Office Manager is the contact person for information regarding Medicare eligibility, coverage, and applying for benefits;- The facility shall inform Medicare beneficiaries of his or her potential liability for payment;- A liability notice shall be issued to Medicare beneficiaries upon admission or during a resident's stay before the facility provides an item or service that is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction (GDR) for psychotropic (medications that affect how the brain works and causes changes in mood, awareness, thoughts, feelings, or behaviors) medications for one resident (Resident #6), failed to provide an appropriate diagnosis for the use of an antipsychotic (medications used to treat psychosis, a mental health condition characterized by delusions, hallucinations, and disorganized thinking) medication for one resident (Resident #27), and failed to get a physician's response to the GDR recommendation for one resident (Resident #4) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 50. Review of the facility policy titled, Gradual Dose Reduction of Psychotropic Drugs, dated 10/01/25, showed: - Residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions and behavioral intervention, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to be managed at a lower dose or to discontinue these drugs; - Within the first year in which a resident is admitted on a psychotropic medication, 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 · D2026-04-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a transfer or discharge to a hospital, including the bed hold rates and reason for the transfer, for five residents (Residents #1, #4, #5, #12, and #26) out of 13 sampled residents. The facility's census was 50.The facility did not provide a policy for Transfer/Discharge Notices or Bed Hold Notices. 1. Review of Resident #1's medical record showed:- Transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and readmitted to the facility on [DATE];- Transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and readmitted to the facility on [DATE];- Transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and readmitted to the facility on [DATE];- The reasons for the transfers were not included on the Transfer/Discharge Notices, dated 11/23/25, 12/23/25, and 02/13/26;- The bed hold daily rate was not included on the Bed Hold Notes, dated 11/23/25, 12/23/25, and 02/13/26. 2. Review of Resident #4's medical record showed:- Transferred to 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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument to be completed by facility staff) assessment within 14 days of a resident admitted to hospice. This affected one resident (Resident #22) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 50.Review of the MDS 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Users Manual, Chapter 5: Submission and Correction of the MDS Assessment, dated October 2025, showed:- Completion timing for Significant Change in Status Assessment, the Care Area Assessment (CAA) completion date must be no later than 14 days from the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) and no later than 14 days from the determination date of the significant change in status. The facility did not provide a policy regarding MDS Submission Timeframes. 1. Review of Resident #22's medical record showed:- An admission date of 09/09/24;- admitted to hospice on 10/21/25;- No significant change MDS dated on or after 10/21/25;- The facility failed to complete a significant change MDS within…
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 before2026-04-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain an order for a urinary catheter (a sterile tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) and failed to provide a diagnosis for the use of a urinary catheter for two residents (Residents #33 and #44) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 50. Review of the facility's policy titled, Indwelling Catheter Use and Removal, implemented on 10/01/25, showed: - It is the policy of this facility to ensure that indwelling urinary catheters that are inserted or remain in place are justified or removed according to regulations and current standards of practice; - A resident will not be catheterized unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that catheterization is necessary; - If an indwelling catheter is in use, the facility will provide appropriate care for the catheter in accordance with current professional standards of practice and resident care policies and procedures that include documentation of the involvement…
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 before2026-04-23 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide documentation of a physician's order and on-going assessments and monitoring after dialysis (a process for removing waste and excess water from the blood) for one resident (Resident #8) out of one sampled resident. The facility's census was 50.Review of the facility's policy titled, Dialysis, approved 01/30/24, showed:- This facility will ensure that residents who require dialysis receive such services consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's goals and preferences;- The facility will ensure appropriate monitoring of the dialysis resident's status before, during, and after the treatments;- If this facility does not employ a qualified professional person to furnish dialysis treatments, the facility will enter into an agreement with a person or agency outside of the facility. This agreement constructs a connection between both entities and fosters accountability that is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement procedures to ensure medications were accurately documented and reconciled for one resident (Resident #21) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 50.Review of the facility policy titled, Controlled Substance Administration and Accountability, dated 10/01/25, showed:- All controlled substances obtained from a non-automated medication cart or cabinet are recorded on the designated usage form. Written documentation must be clearly legible with all applicable information provided;- All specially compounded or non-stock Schedule II controlled substances dispensed from the pharmacy for a specific patient are recorded on the Controlled Drug Record supplied with the medication or other designated form as per facility policy;- In all cases, the dose noted on the usage form or entered into the automated dispensing system must match the dose recorded on the Medication Administration Record (MAR), Controlled Drug Record, or other facility specified form and placed in the patient's medical…
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 27 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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, the facility failed to maintain an error rate of less than five percent (%) when medications were administered. There were 34 opportunities with six errors made, for an error rate of 17.6% which affected three residents (Residents #12, #29, and #32) out of four sampled residents. The facility census was 50.The facility did not provide a policy for insulin administration. Review of the Humalog/insulin lispro (a rapid-acting insulin) and NovoLog/ insulin aspart (a rapid-acting insulin) Pen's Manufacturer Guidelines for Priming Before Each Injection and Administration, revised 02/2023, showed:- Turn the dose selector to select two units;- Hold the pen with the needle pointing up;- Tap the cartridge gently with your finger a few times to make any air bubbles collect at the top of the cartridge;- Keep the needle pointing upwards, press the push-button all the way in;- The dose selector returns to zero;- A drop of insulin should appear at the needle tip. If not, change the needle and repeat the procedure no more than six times. 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 · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled in accordance with currently accepted practices, failed to store medications in a safe and effective manner when staff left the medication refrigerator narcotic medication behind only one lock, and failed to check and maintain a daily refrigerator temperature log. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 50. Review of the facility policy titled, Labeling of Medications and Biologicals, dated 10/01/25, showed:- Medication labels must be legible at all times;- Any medication label that is soiled, incomplete, illegible, worn, or makeshift must be returned and replaced by the issuing pharmacy, not merely covered;- Labels for multi-use vials must include the date the vial was initially opened or accessed (needle-punctured), all opened or accessed vials should be discarded within 28 days unless the manufacturer specifies a different (shorter or longer) date for that opened vial, and unopened or unaccessed vials should be discarded according 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 · D2026-03-02 · 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
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide prescription medications as ordered and notify the physician of the medications not available for administration, in accordance with standards of practice, for one resident (Resident #1) of three sampled residents. The facility census was 50.Review of the facilities undated policy regarding unavailable medications directs staff to:-Maintain a contract with a pharmacy provider to supply the facility with routine, as needed (prn) and emergency medications;- Determine reason for unavailability, length of time medication is unavailable, and what efforts have been attempted by the facility or pharmacy provider to obtain the medication;- Notify physician of inability to obtain medication, upon notification or awareness that the medication is not available. Obtain alternative treatment order and or/ or specific orders for monitoring resident while medication is on hold;- If a resident misses a scheduled dose of medication, staff shall follow procedures for medication errors, including physician/family notifications,…
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 · D2025-09-09 · 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 follow physician's orders for one resident (Resident #1) out of five sampled residents by not administering the resident his/her medications in a timely manner. The facility census was 55. The administration was notified on 09/09/25 of the Past Non-Compliance which occurred on 08/17/25. On 08/31/25, upon notification, the facility administration started an investigation and completed a medication error report. In-serviced staff on Medication Administration Compliance. The non-compliance was corrected on 09/02/25, as the facility in-serviced the nursing staff responsible for medication administration on the facility's policy and procedures for Medication Administration Compliance. The facility policy titled, Physician/Practitioner Orders, undated, showed:- For all physician/practitioner orders received via telephone, the nurse will:a. Document the order notating the time, date, name and title of the person providing the order, and 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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 assess the use of a merry walker (an enclosed framed wheeled walker with a seat) to determine if it was a restraint, and failed to document an ongoing re-evaluation for the use of the merry walker for one resident (Resident #12) out of one sampled resident with a restraint. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Use of Restraints, undated, showed: - Purpose is to ensure that physical and/or chemical restraints are used only when needed to treat the resident's medical symptoms and then, only use the least restrictive alternative for the least amount of time; - The resident's record includes ongoing re-evaluation for the need for a restraint and is effective in treating the medical symptom; - The resident's comprehensive care plan will reflect the resident's goals and the interventions/services needed for the safe use of a restraint as long as it is medically necessary. The facility did not provide a policy regarding merry walkers. 1 Review of Resident #12's April 2024 Physician'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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide scheduled showers for three residents (Residents #5, #24 and #32) out of four sampled residents for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Necessary Care and Services, dated 01/20/24, showed: - The facility will ensure that a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, personal and oral hygiene. 1. Review of Resident #5's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment completed by the facility), dated 10/08/24, showed: - Dependent for personal hygiene and showers. Review of the resident's care plan, revised 10/13/24, showed: - Did not address showers/bathing frequency; - Did not address assistance required for showers/bathing. Review of the shower schedule, dated 12/01/24 - 01/07/25, showed the resident's showers were scheduled for Monday and Thursday night…
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 · D2025-01-09 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff utilized safe transfer techniques for one resident (Resident #29) when staff failed to transfer the resident with assist of a gait belt (a device used to aid in the safe movement of a person from one place to another) of one sampled resident. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Policy on the Use of Gait Belts in Long-Term Care Facilities, dated 01/30/24, showed: - Purpose is to ensure the safe and effective use of gait belts in assisting residents with mobility and transfers, thereby reducing the risk of injury to both residents and staff in long-term care facilities; - Gait belts must be used when assisting residents who require help with walking, standing, or transferring; - Gait belts should be used for residents with unsteady gait, those at risk of falls, or those who need support during mobility activities; - Residents who refuse the use of a gait belt must be accommodated with alternative methods of assistance. 1. Review of Resident #29's medical record showed: - An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #12) out of five sampled residents who were incontinent of bowel and bladder, received appropriate treatment and services after an incontinent episode. Resident #12 was left without personal care for over six hours, resulting in the resident's brief soaked with dark urine and a strong urine odor. The census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Necessary Care and Services, dated, 01/20/24, showed: - The facility will ensure that a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, personal and oral hygiene. 1. Review of Resident #12's quarterly Minimum Data Sets (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility staff), dated 07/26/24 and 10/25/24, showed: - Severe cognitive impairment; - Impairment on both sides of the upper and lower extremities; - Dependent, full assist for sit to stand and transfers; - Totally dependent for personal hygiene; - Totally…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow standards of practice when licensed staff didn't assess one resident's (Resident #12) gastrostomy tube (G-tube) (a small tube that's surgically inserted into the stomach through the abdomen) out of one sampled resident upon readmission to the facility from the emergency room (ER) when the G-tube was replaced after the resident pulled it out at the facility. This resulted in the facility holding the resident's feedings without a physician order for 11 days. The facility also failed to follow physician orders in obtaining weekly weights. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Enteral Nutrition, dated 01/20/24, showed: - Responsibility of licensed nurse; - Assessment guidelines include; condition of mouth and gums, consistency of feces, condition of skin around feeding tube, weight, nutritional status, hydration, ability to chew and swallow, obstruction of esophagus; - Documentation guidelines: reason…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide documentation of on-going assessments and monitoring after dialysis (a process for removing waste and excess water from the blood) center for one resident (Resident #36) out of one sampled resident. The facility's census was 47. Review of the facility's policy, Dialysis, undated showed: - This facility will ensure that residents who require dialysis receive such services consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's goals and preferences; - The facility will ensure appropriate monitoring of the dialysis resident's status before, during, and after the treatments; - If this facility does not employ a qualified professional person to furnish dialysis treatments, the facility will enter into an agreement with a person or agency outside of the facility. This agreement constructs a connection between both entities and fosters accountability that is vital to the health of each…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to limit the use of an as needed (PRN) order for psychotropic (medications that affect how the brain works and causes changes in mood, awareness, thoughts, feelings, or behaviors) medications to 14 days for three residents (Residents #17 and #30) out of two sampled residents and Resident #9 outside of the sample. The facility census was 47. The facility failed to provide a policy for the 14 day stop date on PRN psychotropic medications. 1. Review of Resident #9's January 2025 Physician's Order Sheet (POS) showed: - Diagnosis of restlessness, agitation, and insomnia (difficulty sleeping); - An order for lorazepam (an anti-anxiety medication) 2 milligram (mg)/ milliliter (ml) 0.5 ml sublingually (under the tongue) every two hours PRN for restlessness, dated 11/18/24; - An order for lorazepam 0.5 mg tablet by mouth every four hours PRN for anxiety (persistent worry and fear about everyday situations), dated 11/27/24; - The facility did not provide a 14 day stop date order for the PRN lorazepam order. Review of the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label and store medications in a safe and effective manner when opened insulin was found undated in the medication cart and failed to ensure the medication cart was locked while unattended. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility policy titled, Storage of Medication, dated 01/20/24, showed: - Compartments containing medications are locked when not in use and should not be left unattended; - Narcotics should be double locked at all times. The facility failed to provide a policy regarding dating insulin pens. Review of the manufacturer's recommendations for Lantus (a long-acting type of insulin), dated June 2023, showed: - Discard the medication 28 days after opening. Review of the manufacturer's recommendations for lispro insulin pen (a fast acting type of insulin), dated 2023, showed: - Discard the medication 28 days after opening. Review of the manufacturer's recommendations for Admelog insulin pen (a fast acting type of insulin), dated August 2023,…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to update the facility assessment (an assessment to determine what resources were necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies) at least annually. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, The Purpose and Importance of a Facility Assessment, dated 08/07/24, showed: - Resident profile - the number of current residents and which of their needs have been identified, including physical, medical, ethic, cultural, or religious needs; - Care provided - what care and services are currently provided or offered to residents at the facility; - Resources needed - based on the needs identified in the resident profile, what the facility's staffing, equipment, and supplies are needed to properly care for the residents; - The assessment must be conducted, at a minimum, annually and updated as necessary. The facility must also review and update this assessment whenever there is, or the facility plans for, any change that would require a substantial modification to any…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices during the hall tray meal pass, during incontinent care for two residents (Residents #24 and #40) out of four sampled residents, and during the medication pass for two residents (Residents #24 and #44) out of two sampled residents. The facility also failed to correctly screen five residents (Residents #4, #12, #20, #28, and #97) for tuberculosis (TB - an infectious disease characterized by the growth of nodules in the tissues, especially the lungs) out of five sampled residents required by state regulation 19 CSR 20-20.100. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Hand Hygiene, dated 01/20/24, showed: - Handwashing will be regarded by this facility as the single most important means preventing the spread of infection; - Staff will follow the facility's established hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infections and diseases to other staff, residents, 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 · F2023-12-01 · 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 store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. This has the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 42. The facility failed to provide a policy. 1. Observation on 11/28/23 at 9:29 A.M., of the kitchen showed: - Scrap food items floated in the clogged garbage disposal sink; - The commercial range with brown grime build-up around the control knobs; - Food debris, oily film build-up, two drinking cups, one egg roll on the floor beneath the range; - Microwave oven interior with splattered food debris on all surfaces; - Storage below microwave with splattered grease and food debris on metal bowls and shelf surface; - Storage below steam table with four- twenty quart (qt.) pots with a brown substance on interior surfaces; - Spray bottle with bleach cleaner sat on the window shelf above sink with black grime and scattered debris; - Cabinet drawers contained cooking utensils and scattered debris on the bottom surface; - 1 inch…
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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a facility-initiated transfer when two residents (Resident #17 and #41) out of 14 sampled residents transferred to the hospital. The facility's census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled Discharge/Transfer of Resident, undated showed: - Purpose is to provide safe departure from the facility and to provide sufficient information for aftercare of the resident; - Notice of transfer or discharge to be provided as necessary; - Bed hold forms to be provided as necessary. 1. Review of Resident #17's medical record showed: - Resident transferred to the hospital for medical evaluation on 09/07/23 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - No documentation of written notification to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the resident's transfer to the hospital on [DATE]. 2. Review of Resident # 41's medical record showed: - Resident transferred to the hospital for…
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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written notification of their bed-hold policy to residents and/or their representatives at the time of transfer for two residents (Resident #17 and #41) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility's census was 42. Review of the facility's Bed Hold Guidelines policy, undated, showed: - This facility will notify all residents and/or their representatives of the bed hold guidelines. This notification shall be given on admission to the facility, at the time of transfer to the hospital and at the time of non-covered therapeutic leave. Review of the facility's policy titled Discharge/Transfer of Resident, undated showed: - Purpose is to provide safe departure from the facility and to provide sufficient information for aftercare of the resident; - Notice of transfer or discharge to be provided as necessary; - Bed hold forms to be provided as necessary. 1. Review of Resident #17's medical record showed: - Transferred and admitted to the hospital 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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a baseline care plan (the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for a resident) upon admission with specific interventions for two residents (Resident #12 and #144) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan - Preliminary, dated December 2016, showed: - To assure the resident's immediate care needs are met and maintained, a hand written temporary care plan will implemented for the resident following the admission assessments and interviews with the resident, this handwritten care plan will be started by the admission nurse and updated by nurses of each shift for the first 24 hours; - The Interdisciplinary care plan team (members from different disciplines working together for a common purpose) and/or admitting nurse will review the physician orders and implement a nursing care plan to meet the immediate care needs of the resident; - The temporary care plan will be used until the comprehensive assessment has been completed and an…
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 · D2023-12-01 · 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 implement a care plan with specific interventions to meet individual needs for two residents (Resident #20 and #31) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan Temporary, dated March 2015, showed: - The temporary/handwritten care plan will include, but not limited to quality of care problems, quality of life problems, diagnosis, medications and treatments ordered; - The care plans will include problems, goals, time frames, and interventions related to the immediate care needs. 1. Review of Resident #20's medical record showed: - An admission date of 11/16/22; - Diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, a lung disease that blocks airflow and makes it difficult to breathe) and generalized muscle weakness; - No documentation of the evaluation for bed rails; - No documentation of signed consent by the resident or the resident's representative for bed rails; - Fall risk assessment, dated 11/09/23, showed the resident as a moderate fall…
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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess residents for the use of bed rails prior to installation or use nor did they obtain informed consent from the resident or if applicable, the resident representative for two residents (Resident #11 and #20) out of 14 sampled residents and one resident (Resident #2) outside the sample with bed rails in use. The facility's census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled, Restraints, Physical, dated March 2015, showed the following: - If side rails are used, there shall be an interdisciplinary assessment of the resident, consultation with the attending physician, and input from the resident and/or legal representative; - The staff shall obtain consent for the use of side rails from the resident or the resident's legal representative prior to their use; - Side rails may be used if assessment and consultation with the attending physician has determined that they are needed to help manage a medical symptom or condition, or to help…
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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (Resident #32 and #36) outside of the sample were free of significant medication errors when staff failed to prime an insulin (medication used to lower blood sugar) pen and hold for a count of six seconds at the site of administration as recommended by the manufacturer to ensure the residents received the full and correct dose of insulin. The facility's census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication, Administration Guidelines, dated March 2015, showed: - It is the purpose of the facility that residents receive their medications on a timely basis and in accordance with established policies; - The complete act of administration entails removing an individual dose from a previously dispensed, properly labeled container, verifying it with the physicians' orders, giving the individual dose to the proper resident and promptly recording the information. Review of the Novolog (insulin) Kwik Pen manufacturer instruction manual showed: - The pen must be primed before use; - 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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the dumpster was maintained to keep pests out and/or to keep the garbage contained in the dumpster. This failure had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 42. Review of the facility's Waste Disposal policy, dated April, 2011, showed: - Dumpster lids are to be closed at all times; - Dumpster and dumpster area are to be kept clean and free of debris. 1. Observation on 11/28/23 at 9:49 A.M., and 12:52 P.M., 11/29/23 at 3:06 P.M., 11/30/23 at 4:05 P.M., and 12/01/23 at 8:00 A.M., and 10:32 A.M., of the outside trash dumpster located near the kitchen entrance showed: - One 8 yard (yd.) dumpster partially filled with one plastic lid completely opened; - Twelve soiled disposable exam gloves, scattered debris, 1 broken porcelain toilet lid, and two damaged wheel chairs lay on the ground beside the dumpster; - Oily grime build-up along the front concrete edge of dumpster area. During an interview on 12/01/23 at 11:03 A.M., the Maintenance Director said the trash dumpster should be closed when it was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain adequate infection control practices to prevent the transmission of infection when staff demonstrated poor hand hygiene for two residents (Resident #4, and #33) out of two sampled residents. The facility also failed to ensure the prevention of communicable disease in regards to Tuberculosis (TB) (a communicable disease that affects the lungs characterized by fever, cough and difficulty breathing) by not completing the admission TB screening and/or a yearly risk assessment for symptoms for five residents (Resident #1, #8, #18, #19, and #24) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled, Perineal Care, dated March 2015, showed: - To cleanse the perineum; - To prevent infection and odor; - Put on disposable gloves; - Wet washcloth and make a mitt with it. Apply soap lightly; - Use one gloved hand to stabilize and separate the labia, with the other hand, wash from front to back; - Rinse and pat dry; - Use a new washcloth and wash around the anus. Rinse…
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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0882 — isolatedDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to designate one or more individuals with the required primary professional training as the Infection Preventionist (IP) for the facility's infection prevention control program. The facility census was 42. The facility did not provide a policy regarding required primary professional training for the Infection Preventionist. During an interview on 12/01/23 at 9:30 A.M., the Infection Preventionist said that he/she is not a nurse nor is he/she trained in any other related field. The IP said that he/she is a licensed nursing home administrator and has successfully completed the nursing home infection preventionist training course. The IP said that he/she thought the regulation had changed and that anyone who completes the nursing home infection preventionist training could be the IP. During an interview on 12/01/23 at 10:40 A.M., the Administrator said that she was told that the Infection Preventionist could be anyone who had completed the nursing home infection preventionist training course.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-01 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to conduct regular inspections of all bed frames and rails as part of a regular maintenance program for two resident's (Resident #11 and #20) out of 14 sampled residents with bed rails in use. The facility's census was 42. Review of the facility's policy titled, Restraints, Physical, dated March 2015, showed the following: - Inspect by maintenance staff of all beds and related equipment as part of our regular bed safety program to identify risks and problems including potential entrapment risks; - The maintenance department shall provide a copy of inspections to the administrator and report results to the QA committee for appropriate action. Copies of the inspection results and QA committee recommendations shall be maintained by the administrator and/or safety committee. 1. Observations of Resident #11 showed: - On 11/28/23 at 11:01 A.M., resident in bed with quarter side rail up on left side of bed; - On 11/29/23 at 8:57 A.M., resident in bed with quarter side rail up on left side of bed; - On 11/30/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-01 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents and staff in the facility. The facility census was 42. The facility did not provide a policy. 1. Observation on 11/28/23 at 10:38 A.M. of room [ROOM NUMBER], showed: - One, 9 inch (in.) x 11 in. picture frame and two, 5 in. x 7 in. picture frames on top of the light fixture above the bed and one five foot long foil [NAME] draped over the light fixture above the head of the bed by the door. 2. Observation on 11/28/23 at 10:56 A.M., of room [ROOM NUMBER], showed: - One, 8 in x 11 in. canvas painting on top of a light fixture above the bed by the door; - Two, 2 foot areas of dry wall damage at head of bed, one tube of cream on top of a light fixture above bed, and a wooden board covered in plexiglass attached to the wall on the left side of the bed closest to the window had damage along the top edge with pieces of wood…
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 · D2023-12-01 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct at least twelve hours of nurse aide in-service education per year and failed to provide the required annual competencies of abuse prevention and dementia care for two out of two nurse aides sampled. The facility census was 42. The facility did not provide a policy. 1. Record review of the facility's 2023 in-service records showed: - Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) C with a hire date of 12/07/20; - CNA C attended a total of one hour of in-services; - CNA C did not attend an annual competency in-service on abuse prevention; - CNA C did not attend an annual competency in-service on dementia care. 2. Record review of the facility's 2023 in-service records showed: - CNA F with a hire date of 09/17/15; - CNA F attended a total of one hour of in-services; - CNA F did not attend an annual competency in-service on abuse prevention; - CNA F did not attend an annual competency in-service on dementia care. During an interview on 11/30/23 at 8:30 A.M., the Infection Preventionist said training is provided during 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.
“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 ASPIRE SENIOR LIVING — 16 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.9★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CHP SNF OPCO HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/18/2024 |
| CHP SNF HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/05/2025 |
| CHP SNFCO LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| BRODY, MICHAEL | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| BROWN, BARBARA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| BROWN, DANIEL | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2024 |
| EICKHOFF, PAMELA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/05/2025 |
| LEIPHAM, MICHELLE | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/05/2025 |
| SHEVLYAGIN, VICTOR | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| STADTMUELLER, DAVID | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2024 |
| CALDWELL, FRED | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2024 |
| TRAMEL, TARA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/12/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 80% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $883K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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 265450. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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.