Copper Rock Healthcare
712 Copper Rock Drive, Rogersville, MO 65742 · Non profit - Corporation · 90 certified beds · (417) 202-4606 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (78%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.4% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.6% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.8% | 2.3% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.5% | 18.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 9.3% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 11.2% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 32.1% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.2% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.0% | 4.5% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.0% | 17.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.3% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 19.0% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.1% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.3% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.35 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.62 | 2.33 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
42.2% 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 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 54.3% 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 22% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 42.2%CMS range 31.9–53.2 | 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 | 10.4%CMS range 6.4–15.4 | 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 | 54.3% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 42.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 51.4% | 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 | 97.8% | 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 | 8.9% | 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 | 7.7%CMS range 4.5–14.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.01 | 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 90 beds and averages 74.3 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 16 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.54 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 2.47 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.71 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 78% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
31 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-08-19 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all residents were free from significant medication errors when staff administered another resident's medication to one resident (Resident #1) resulting in an unsafe drop in blood pressure and hospitalization of the resident. Staff also failed to administer insulin as ordered and contact the physician regarding insulin not available for one resident (Resident #3) resulting in elevated blood sugar levels and hospitalization of the resident. A sampled of ten residents were reviewed in a facility with a census of 67. 1. Review of the facility policy titled Administering Medications, April 2019, showed the following: -Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed; -The Director of Nursing Services supervises and directs all personnel who administer medications and/or have related functions; -Medications are administered in accordance with prescribed orders, including any required time frame; -Medication errors are…
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 · F2026-03-13 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — widespreadEnsure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure nurse aides (NA) were not used for more than four months without completing required training and evaluations when the facility did not have an effective process in place to ensure certified nurse aide (CNA) training programs were completed timely for NAs resulting in one NA (NA K) working longer than four months in the facility without completing the CNA training course. The facility census was 77.Review showed the facility did not provide a policy regarding NA training. 1. Review of NA K's personnel file showed the following:-Date of hire of 08/25/25 (six months and sixteen days prior);-NA K enrolled in the nurse aide training program on 01/06/26;-Staff did not have documentation NA K completed the nurse aide training program. Review of the facility's Daily Rosters showed the following:-On 03/08/26, NA K scheduled to work on the floor as an aide;-On 03/09/26, NA K scheduled to work on the floor as an aide;-On 03/11/26, NA K scheduled to work on the floor as an aide;-On 03/13/26, NA K scheduled 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 · F2026-03-13 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — widespreadMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 residents with a complete and fully functional call light system when the facility failed to have process in place to notify staff of sounding call lights when call lights notifications could not be heard on the hall and the facility staff did not use the cell phone pagers for notification of call lights. The facility census was 77. Review of the facility policy titled, Call System, Residents, dated November 2025, showed the following:-Residents are provided with a means to call staff for assistance through a communication system that directly calls a staff member or a centralized work station;-Each resident is provided with a means to call staff directly from his/her bed, from toileting/bathing facilities and from the floor;-Call system communication may be audible or visible;-The resident call system remains functional at all times;-If audible communication is used, the volume is maintained at an audible level that can be easily…
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 · E2026-03-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care per standards of practice when staff failed to ensure an oxygen tank was turned on while in the dining room for one resident (Resident #18), failed to ensure the oxygen tank contained sufficient oxygen for one resident (Resident #75) while in the dining room, and failed to ensure the humidifying bottles were filled with water for three residents (Resident #75, #9, and #2) with oxygen concentrators in their room. The facility census was 77.Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, dated November 2025, showed the following:-Purpose to provide guidelines for safe oxygen administration;-Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure;-Review the physician's orders of facility protocol for oxygen administration;-Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident;-Oxygen therapy is administered by way of an oxygen mask (device that fits over mouth and nose),…
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 · E2026-03-13 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food served was appetizing when staff served food that was not an appetizing temperature, failed to season food, and failed to cook food appropriately for 10 residents (Residents #17, #34, #15, #60, #28, #61, #66, #58, #5, and #38) of 25 sampled residents. The facility census was 77.Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food served was appetizing when staff served food that was not an appetizing temperature, failed to season food, and failed to cook food appropriately for 10 residents (Residents #17, #34, #15, #60, #28, #61, #66, #58, #5, and #38) of 25 sampled residents. The facility census was 77. Review of the facility policy The Dining Experience: Staff Roles, Guideline and Procedure Manual, dated 2020, showed the dining services manager or designee will be present in the dining room at all meals to ensure that the meals served follow a planned menu, are plated in an attractive manner. are palatable, served at the appropriate temperatures, served…
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 · E2026-03-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain effective and complete an infection prevention and control program when staff failed to follow appropriate Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities) for one resident (Resident #5) with an indwelling catheters (tubing placed to drain the bladder to outside the body). Staff failed to follow acceptable standards of care for performing hand hygiene and glove use during personal care for four residents (Residents #49, #3,#21, and #23). The facility census was 77. 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, reviewed December 2025, showed the following:-EBP are used as an infection prevention and control intervention to reduce the spread of multi-drug-resistant organisms (MDROs) to residents;-EBP employs targeted gown and glove use…
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 · D2026-03-13 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed ensure all residents had interventions in place and followed to ensure acceptable parameters of nutritional status were maintained when staff failed to assist two residents (Resident #18 and #75) during meals. A sample of 25 residents was reviewed for dietary concerns. The facility census was 77. 1. Review of Resident #18's face sheet (a quick-glance referral of the resident's information) showed the following:-admission date of 01/17/25;-Diagnoses included dementia, chronic systolic (heart failure), chronic kidney disease, stage 3 (kidneys losing the ability to filter blood, leading to waste build-up), and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm). Review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated comprehensive assessment instrument completed by facility staff), dated 01/22/26, showed severe cognitive deficit. Review of the resident's current care plan showed the following:-An ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit due to dementia;-Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-13 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an effective pain management program was in place for each resident when staff failed to address one resident's (Resident #23) complaint of pain. The facility census was 77.Review of the facility policy Pain Assessment and Management, revised April 2025, showed the following:-Purpose to help staff identify pain in the resident, develop interventions consistent with the resident's goals and needs, and address the underlying causes of pain;-Pain management included identifying signs and symptoms of and assessing existing pain; -recognizing situations and conditions with the potential for pain; -addressing the underlying causes of the pain; developing and implementing approaches to pain management based on accepted standards of practice; monitoring for the effectiveness of interventions, and modifying approaches as necessary;-Comprehensive pain assessments are conducted upon admission, quarterly, whenever there is a significant change…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-12-11 · tag F0837 — widespreadEstablish a governing body that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies for managing and operating the facility and appoints a properly licensed administrator responsible for managing the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the administrator of the facility had an active and valid administrator's license when the facility failed to confirm renewal of his/her license, and the administrator continued his/her normal job duties for a period of 20 days without a valid license. The facility census was 77.On 07/21/25, the facility's corporation became aware of the Administrator's license expiration. The facility removed the Administrator from his/her role and provided counseling. The facility's corporation appointed the [NAME] President (VP) of Operations, who had a current valid administrator's license, to the administrator role on 07/21/25. The corporation implemented audits of the licenses of all administrators with the corporation. The noncompliance was corrected on 07/21/25. Review of the facility's Administrator Job Description Policy, dated 01/01/19, showed the following:-Must possess a current Nursing Home Administrator's license from the State of Missouri;-Employee must be able to maintain the facility's current licensure to operate…
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 before2025-08-06 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility staff failed to implement their abuse/neglect policy to protect all residents during an abuse allegation investigation when staff allowed one staff member (Certified Medication Tech (CMT) A) continue to work independently after one resident (Resident #1) made an allegation of abuse involving the CMT. The facility census is 80. Review of the facility policy titled Abuse Prevention, Reporting, and Investigation, revised 02/2017, showed the following:-It is the policy of the facility that reports of suspicions of abuse will be reported and thoroughly investigated;-Physical abuse is defined as hitting, slapping, pinching, kicking, etc;-Should an allegation be made of an incident, or suspected incident of resident abuse, mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, or events that cause the allegation to occur involve abuse or result in serious bodily; the incident will be immediately, but no later than two hours after the allegation is made, reported to the Administrator, or his/her designee, and other officials including 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 · D2025-04-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents dependent on staff to for grooming and personal hygiene received baths/showers in a timely fashion for two dependent resident's (Resident #1 and #2). The facility census was 79. Review of the facility's policy titled, Bath, Shower/Tub, revised February 2018, showed the following: -Purpose to promote cleanliness, provide comfort to the resident, and to observe the condition of the resident's skin; -Document date and time the shower/tub bath was performed; -Document the name and title of the individual(s) who assisted the resident with the shower/tub bath, all assessment data obtained during the shower/tub bath, how the resident tolerated the shower/tub bath, if the resident refused the shower/tub bath, the reason(s) why and the intervention taken, and the signature and title of the person recording the data; -Notify the supervisor if the resident refuses the shower/tub bath; -Notify the physician of any skin areas that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 20 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-04 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care per professional standards related to pressure ulcers (refers to localized damage to the skin and/or underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical or other device) when the facility staff failed to obtain physician's orders for treatment and interventions of wounds and failed to update the care plan regarding skin breakdown intervention changes for one resident (Resident #3) out of seven sampled residents. The facility census was 79. Review of the facility's policy titled, Pressure Injury Risk Assessment, revised March 2020, showed the following: -Identify all risk factors and then determine which can be modified and which cannot, or which can be immediately addressed, and which will take time to modify; -The risk assessment should be conducted as soon as possible after admission, but no later than eight hours after admission is completed; -Once the assessment is conducted a risk factor are identified and characterized, a resident centered care plan can be created…
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 before2025-04-04 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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 an effective and accurate pain management program was in place when staff failed to ensure pain patches were on-hand for administration, when staff documented administration of pain patches that were not administered, and when staff failed to accurately document monitoring of the pain patch placement for one resident (Resident #1) out of 7 sampled residents. The facility census was 79. Review of the facility's policy titled, Documentation of Medication Administration Policy, revised April 2007, showed the following: -Administration of medication must be documented immediately after (never before) it is given; -Documentation must include at a minimum: name, strength of drug, dose, method of administration, date and time of administration, reason(s) why a medication was withheld, not administered, or refused, signature and title of person administering the medication, and resident response to the medication, if applicable. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication and Treatment Orders, revised…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-25 · 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 observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food stored in the kitchen pantry, refrigerators, freezer and the kitchenette refrigerators for five of five halls were labeled, dated, sealed, and stored at the appropriate temperature. These failures had the potential to increase the prevalence and spread of foodborne illness and infection among all facility residents. Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Storage (Dry, Refrigerated, and Frozen,) dated 2020, showed the general storage dry storage guidelines were as follows: -All food items will be labeled. The label must include the name of the food and the date by which it should be sold, consumed, or discarded; -Discard food that has passed the expiration date and discard food that has been prepared in the facility after seven days of storing under proper refrigeration; -Keep potentially hazardous foods out of the temperature danger zone (41 degrees Fahrenheit (F) to 135 degrees F); -Leftover contents of cans and prepared food will be stored in covered, labeled, and dated containers…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-25 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain documentation for clinical indication of use for antibiotics with the potential to effect all residents in the facility. Review of the facility's Facility Antibiotic Stewardship Review and Surveillance of Antibiotic Use and Outcomes Policy Statement, revised December 2016, showed the following: -Antibiotic usage and outcome data will be collected and documented using a facility-approved antibiotic surveillance tracking form; -The data will be used to guide decisions for improvement of individual resident antibiotic prescribing practices and facility-wide antibiotic stewardship; -The Infection Preventionist (IP), or designee, will review antibiotic utilization as part of the antibiotic stewardship program and identify specific situations that are not consistent with the appropriate use of antibiotics; -Therapy may require further review and possible changes if the organism is susceptible to narrower spectrum antibiotic; therapy was ordered for prolonged surgical prophylaxis; or therapy was started awaiting culture,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
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 dignity was provided to all residents when staff failed to keep urinary catheter (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid) drainage bags covered for two residents (Resident #128 and #5) and when staff administered nasal medication in the dining room to one resident (Resident #31). A sample of 19 residents was reviewed. Review of the facility's policy titled, Dignity, dated February 2021, showed the following: -Each resident will be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem; -Staff promote, maintain, and protect resident privacy, including bodily privacy during assistance with personal care and during treatment procedures. 1. Review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment completed by facility staff), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/23/23, located in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-25 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide documentation in each resident's medical record of the consulting pharmacist's recommendations after the monthly medication review was conducted for each resident in the facility and documentation of the attending physician's response to the consulting pharmacist's recommendations for four of four residents (Residents #38, #55, #31 and #2) reviewed for monthly medication regimen review in a sample of 19 residents. Review of the facility's Facility Medication Regimen Review Policy showed the following: -The Consultant Pharmacist will perform a medication regimen review (MRR) for every resident in the facility; -Routine reviews will be done monthly; -Consultant Pharmacist will document his/her findings and recommendations on the monthly drug/medication regimen review report; -The Consultant Pharmacist will provide a written report to physicians for each resident with an identified irregularity; -If the Physician does not provide a pertinent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-25 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the nutritional needs of all residents were met when staff failed to follow the recipe and failed to provide the correct serving size of pureed foods to four residents on pureed diets. Review of the Standardized Recipes policy, dated 2020, showed the following: -Standardized recipes will be used for all menu items, including pureed and therapeutic diets; -Each standardized recipe will include name of product; number of servings or yield; ingredients; measurement and/or weight of ingredients; procedures for assembling/method of production; size of pan needed; serving sizes; and modifications for therapeutic diets if applicable; -Recipes will be scaled to the number served; -The Registered Dietitian will approve recipe changes or new recipes utilized for a menu item. 1. Review of the lunch menu, dated 01/24/24, showed the cooks were to serve the following pureed foods: beef stew, creamed peas, biscuit, and pear cake. Review of the 2024 Pureed Creamed Peas recipe, showed the ingredients included: 2.5…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-25 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that 10 of the 10 residents (including Resident #20, #11, and #62) with a physician's order for a mechanical soft diet were served foods prepared in a mechanical soft form to meet their needs. Review of the facility's policy titled, Diet Summary, dated 2023, showed the following; -Dental soft (mechanical soft) diet is a consistency modified diet for individuals with limited or difficulty in chewing regular textured foods; -The diet follows the regular diet planned and provides foods that can be easily chewed; -The diet consists of food of nearly regular textures, but eliminates very hard, sticky, crunchy or hard to chew foods; -Foods should be moist and fork tender; -Meat is ground or chopped into bite-size pieces (½ inch or smaller) and should be mixed or served with gravy, broth, or another type of moistening agent; -Casseroles should contain bite-size chunks of meat, ground or tender meats that are less than ½ inch in size (this will generally fit though the tongs of a fork). 1. Review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed ensure one (Resident #2), of two residents reviewed for hospitalization, received written notice of transfer to the hospital that included the reason for the transfer, the location of the transfer, a statement of the resident's appeal rights, and the contact information for the office of the Ombudsman. Review of the facility provided a blank form named, Notice of Resident and Discharge, undated showed the form contained spaces to document the following: -Location of the transfer; -Reason for the transfer; -Resident's appeal rights; -Contact information for the State Long-Term Care Appeal Agency, the Missouri Protection and Advocacy Agency, and the Long-Term Care Ombudsman for the region. 1. Review of Resident #2's Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) showed the following: -admission date of 02/11/20; -Diagnoses included dementia, anxiety, and unsteadiness on feet. Review of the resident's significant change of condition Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · 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 record review, and interviews, the facility failed ensure one resident (Resident #2), of two residents reviewed for hospitalization, received written notice of the bed hold policy upon transfer to the hospital. Review of the facility's Bed Hold Policy, undated, showed the policy did not address when the bed hold notice would be provided or by whom. 1. Review of Resident #2's Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) showed the following: -admission date of 02/11/20; -Diagnoses include dementia, anxiety, and unsteadiness on her feet. Review of the resident's significant change of condition Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 11/28/23, located in the MDS tab of the EMR, showed the following: -Resident had severely impaired cognition; -Resident had delusions and wandered occasionally. Review of the resident's Communication - with Physician notes, dated 01/13/24, located in the Notes…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide restorative nursing services to maintain, improve, or prevent avoidable decline in range of motion (ROM) and mobility for one resident (Resident #4) of two residents reviewed for limited range of motion. Review of the facility's policy titled Restorative Nursing Services, dated July 2017, showed the following: -Residents will receive restorative nursing care as needed to help promote optimal safety and independence; -Restorative nursing care consists of nursing interventions that may or may not be accompanied by formalized rehabilitative services (e.g., physical, occupational or speech therapies); -Residents may be started on a restorative nursing program upon admission, during the course of stay, or when discharged from rehabilitative care; -Restorative goals and objectives are individualized and resident-centered, and are outlined in the resident's plan of care. 1. Review of Resident #4's Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) showed the following: -admission date of 03/13/21; -Diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · 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 record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff took steps to prevent accidents (falls) for all staff when staff failed to complete a root cause analysis, implement new interventions, or document the reason new interventions were not implemented for one resident (Resident #2), of four sampled residents, who had multiple falls. Review of the facility's policy titled, Fall Risk Assessment, dated March 2018, showed the following: -For an individual who has fallen, the staff and practitioner will begin to try to identify possible causes within 24 hours of the fall; -Often, multiple factors contribute to a falling problem; -If the cause of the fall is unclear, or if the individual continues to fall despite attempted interventions, a physician will review the situation to help further identify causes and contributing factors; -The staff and physician will continue to collect and evaluate information until either the cause of the falling is identified, or it is determined the cause cannot be found or is not correctable; - Based on the preceding assessment, 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 · D2024-01-25 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff took steps to protect all resident with indwelling urinary catheters (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid) from potential infection when staff allowed two resident's (Resident #5 and #128) catheter tubing and collection bag to be in contact with the floor. Three residents reviewed for catheters and urinary tract infection. Review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care, Urinary, dated September 2014, showed the following: -The purpose of this procedure is to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections; -Be sure the tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor. 1. Review of the residents' Profile tab, in the electronic medical record (EMR), showed the following: -admission date of 03/26/21; -Diagnoses included dementia, enlarged prostate with lower urinary tract symptoms, neurogenic bladder (urinary conditions in people who lack bladder control due to a brain, spinal cord, or nerve problem), urinary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that one of one nurse was competent with skills and knowledge to provide care for one of one resident (Resident #56) who used a Dexcom G7 Continuous Glucose Monitoring device (a method to track glucose levels throughout the day and night) out of a total sample of 19 residents. Review of the External Blood Glucose Monitoring Devices-Dexcom-Policy & Procedure, dated 01/2024, showed the following : -The Use of Dexcom Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Device in the long-term skilled nursing facility is crucial for ensuring the effective management of diabetes for residents requiring continuous glucose monitoring; -Nursing staff responsible for the application, maintenance, and interpretation of Dexcom CGM data will receive comprehensive training on device usage, troubleshooting, and data analysis; -Residents and their designated caregivers will receive education on the purpose, function, and care of the Dexcom CGM device; -Nursing staff will regularly monitor and interpret Dexcom CGM data to ensure…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to have documentation of increased behaviors to warrant the increased dosage of the antipsychotic medication for one resident (Resident #29) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Review of the facility's policy titled, Behavioral Assessment, Intervention and Monitoring, dated March 2019, showed the following: -Behavioral symptoms will be identified using facility-approved behavioral screening tools and the comprehensive assessment; -If the resident is being treated for altered behavior or mood, the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will seek and document any improvements or worsening in the individual's behavior, mood, and function; -If antipsychotic medications are used to treat behavioral symptoms, the IDT will monitor their indications. 1. Review of Resident #29's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff), with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 12/20/23, located in the MDS tab of the EMR, showed the following: -admission date of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-25 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the skin assessment accurately reflected the current skin condition for one (Resident #5), of three residents, in the sample of 19 residents reviewed for presence of pressure ulcers or other skin conditions. Review of the facility's policy titled, Charting and Documentation, dated July 2017, showed the following: -The medical record should facilitate communication between the interdisciplinary team regarding the resident's condition and response to care; -Documentation in the medical record will be objective (not opinionated or speculative), complete, and accurate. 1. Review of the Profile tab in Resident #5's electronic medical record (EMR) showed the following: -admission date of 03/26/21; -Diagnoses included disorder of the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Review of the resident's Care Plan, dated 05/03/23 and located in the Care Plan tab of the EMR, showed the following: -Resident had potential for altered skin integrity related to decreased mobility and compromised immune system; -On 05/3/23,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility staff failed to report an allegation of resident to resident abuse involving two residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) immediately to administration per their policy and failed to report the allegation to the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) within the required two hours of the facility staff becoming aware of the allegation. The facility census was 78. Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse investigation and Reporting, revised 07/2017, showed the following: -All reports of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation, mistreatment or injuries of unknown origin shall be promptly to reported to the local, state and federal agencies (as defined by the regulations) and thoroughly investigated; -All alleged violations involving abuse will be reported by the facility administrator or his/her designee to the state licensing/certification agency responsible for surveying /licensing to the facility; -An alleged violation of abuse will…
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 before2023-12-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that an allegation of possible abuse was thoroughly and timely investigated, when a staff member failed to report and begin an investigation into a physical altercation between two residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) that resulted in injury to one resident. The facility census was 78. Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse investigation and Reporting, revised 07/2017, showed the following: - All reports of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation, mistreatment or injuries of unknown origin shall be promptly to reported to the local, state and federal agencies (as defined by the regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of abuse investigations will also be reported; -If an incident or suspected incident of resident abuse, the Administrator will assign the investigation to an appropriate individual; -The Administrator will provide any supporting documents relative to the alleged incident…
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 · D2021-10-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and observation, the facility staff failed to perform a timely initial wound assessment for one resident (Resident #82) who returned from the hospital with a wound and wound orders. The facility failed to obtain a physician's order for wound treatment, failed to perform and document complete weekly skin assessments, and failed to update the care plan for one resident (Resident #13) when the resident developed a wound on the toe. The facility census was 82. Record review of the facility's policy titled Wound Care, dated October 2010, showed the following information: -The purpose of the procedure is to provide guidelines for the care of wounds to promote healing; -Staff should verify there is a physician's order for the procedure; -Staff should document all assessment data, such as the wound bed (bottom of the wound) color, size of the wound, drainage, obtained when inspecting the wound. Record review of the facility's policy titled Pressure Ulcers/Skin Breakdown-Clinical…
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 before2021-10-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and observation, the facility failed to routinely complete full weekly wound assessments for two residents (Resident #28 and Resident #67) with pressure wounds and failed to ensure a dressing was maintained in place as ordered for one resident (Resident #28). The facility census was 82. Record review of the facility's policy titled Wound Care, dated October 2010, showed the following information: -The purpose of the procedure is to provide guidelines for the care of wounds to promote healing; -Staff should verify there is a physician's order for the procedure; -Staff should document all assessment data, such as the wound bed (bottom of the wound) color, size of the wound, drainage, obtained when inspecting the wound. Record review of the facility's policy titled Pressure Ulcers/Skin Breakdown-Clinical Protocol, dated April 2018, showed the following: -The the nurse should describe and document a full assessment of pressure ulcers, including location, stage (the degree of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| PACE, ROY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/20/2018 |
| ALTER, SHIRLEY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2019 |
| GREGORY, MARY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/24/2004 |
| MILLER, SHERRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 10/16/1994 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 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.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $433K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 265878. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-13, 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.