Life Care Center Of St Louis
3520 Chouteau Ave, Saint Louis, MO 63103 · For profit - Individual · 100 certified beds · (314) 771-2100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0569)
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- 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
- the CMS record shows $15,646 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-21)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- nursing-staff turnover (66%) 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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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 | 10.2% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.3% | 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 | 0.0% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.5% | 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 | 1.1% | 4.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.3% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.8% | 25.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.4% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.4% | 17.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.6% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 2.2% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.4% | 63.5% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.1% | 26.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.2% | 13.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.26 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.17 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
61.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 90 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 95.3% 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 43 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 | 61.4%CMS range 51.7–71.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.3%CMS range 7.5–15.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 95.3% | 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 | 88.4% | 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 | 79.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 87.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 25.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 7.1%CMS range 3.6–12.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.05 | 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 100 beds and averages 91.8 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.14 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.23 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 66% 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 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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-21 · 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 and record review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for x-rays for one of seven sampled residents (Resident #1) who had fallen from his/her bed on 9/6/24. The x-ray order was not completed for nine days, during which time the resident experienced pain and refused care, which he/she had not done prior. The resident was diagnosed with a fractured hip. The sample was 7. The census was 86. The Administrator was notified on 10/21/24 at 3:46 P.M., of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) past non-compliance, which occurred on 09/06/24. Facility staff were inserviced beginning on 9/13/24 and a system was implemented to monitor the completion of ordered x-rays. The IJ was corrected on 9/16/24. Review of Resident #1's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 6/13/24, showed the following: -Diagnoses of diabetes, heart failure and peripheral vascular disease (PVD, a circulatory condition that occurs when blood vessels outside of 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 · Ecited before2026-01-16 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program when staff failed to change gloves, wash or sanitize hands and wear gowns during care for residents on 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) for four residents (Residents #101, #81, #9 and #56). The staff failed to change gloves and wash hands during perineal care (cleaning the genital and anal areas) for one resident observed during care (Resident #63). In addition, laundry staff failed to separate dirty linens from clean and washed linens. The sample was 23. The census was 90.Review of the facility's Hand Hygiene Policy, dated 10/28/25, showed:-Unless hands are visibly soiled, an alcohol-based hand rub is preferred over soap and waterin most clinical situations;-Associates…
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 · E2026-01-16 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure five out of 10 randomly selected Certified Nurse Aide (CNA)/Certified Medication Technicians (CMT), employed by the facility for over 12 months received their annual 12 hours of in-service training. The census was 90.Review of the facility's CNA 12 Hours of Inservice Training policy, dated 12/17/25, showed the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) will develop, implement, and maintain an effective in-service program for all nurse aides to ensure they have received the necessary in-services and education to meet the federal requirement. CNAs have a requirement of at least 12 hours of continuing competency every 12 months and must include dementia management training and resident abuse training. Review of the facility's Personal In-Service Records, dated in-service year 2025, and reviewed on 1/12/26, showed:-CMT R, date of hire 6/20/22, with 2.0 hours of in-service training;-CMT S, date of hire 10/30/18, with 3.25 hours of in-service training;-CNA T, date of hire 7/25/18, with 2.0 hours of in-service training;-CNA U,…
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 · D2026-01-16 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to create an environment that supported and respected the right of a resident to make choices about significant aspects of daily life. The failure affected one resident (Resident #66) who requested to get out of bed for meals. Resident #66 required extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) due to left-side paralysis and required staff assistance for transfers out of bed. The facility utilized a get-up list to determine which residents would be assisted out of bed in the morning. This process did not consider or honor the resident stated preference to be out of bed for all meals. The facility census was 90. Review of the facility's Policy for Resident Rights, dated 6/8/2020, showed:-The resident has the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment, including the right to be fully informed in language that he or she can understand of his or her total health status, including but not limited to, his or her medical condition; the right to participate in the development 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 · D2026-01-16 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
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 residents or the resident's Durable Power of Attorney - Healthcare (DPOA-Healthcare) were invited to participate in all aspects of person-centered care planning for one resident (Resident #67) who was not notified in spending down the resident's resources on medical requirement in the amount of $2,725.80 and did not authorize the funds to be spent. The sample was 23. The census was 90.Review of the facility's Policy for Resident Rights, dated 6/8/20, showed:-The resident has the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment, including the right to be fully informed in language that he or she can understand of his or her total health status, including but not limited to, his or her medical condition; the right to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person centered plan of care;-The resident has the right to participate in the planning process, including the right to identify individuals or roles to be included in the planning process, the right to request…
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 · D2026-01-16 · tag F0577 — isolatedAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to post in a place readily accessible to residents, family members and legal representatives of residents, the results of the most recent survey and complaint investigations of the facility in a location where they would not be required to ask staff for assistance. The census was 90.Observations on 1/12/26 through 1/15/26, showed no survey results maintained at the entrance of the building, in the lobby of the building or at the desk with the receptionist. No signs were posted for the location of the survey results and/or availability of the last survey or complaint investigations. During a group interview on 1/13/26 at 10:00 A.M., six residents, who the facility identified as alert and oriented, attended the group meeting. All six residents said they were unaware of where the state survey results were located. Observation on 1/15/26 at 11:48 A.M., showed a dresser diagonal from the receptionist's area, No signs or posting sat on top of the dresser, or anywhere in the area surrounding the dresser. Upon opening the dresser, 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 · Dcited before2026-01-16 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure services provided meet professional standards when one resident's physician order was not transcribed onto the physician order sheet timely (Resident #91). The sample was 23. The census was 90.Review of Resident #91's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 10/30/25, showed:-Moderately impaired cognition;-No rejection of care;-Resident had an indwelling catheter (a sterile tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine);-Diagnoses included renal (kidney) insufficiency, renal failure or end stage renal disease (ESRD, chronic irreversible kidney failure) and obstructive uropathy (disorder of the urinary tract that occurs due to obstructed urinary flow). Review of the resident's care plan, in use at the time of survey, showed:-Focus: had a left nephrostomy (a flexible tube inserted through the back into the kidney to drain urine when the normal urinary tract is blocked) related…
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 · D2026-01-16 · 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 a resident who required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) received showers and personal care in accordance with their personal needs, for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident #56). The census was 90. Review of the facility's Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) policy, reviewed 9/10/24, showed:-Policy: The resident will receive assistance as needed to complete ADLs. Any change in the ability to perform ADLs will be reported to the nurse;-A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. Review of Resident #56's medical record, showed diagnoses included hidradenitis suppurative (HS, a chronic painful skin condition causing recurring boils, blackheads, and painful lumps that form deep in hair follicles, often in skin folds leading to pus drainage, tunnels and inflammation. Common areas affected are buttocks…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-23 · tag F0623 — widespreadProvide 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to submit facility initiated transfers (such as an emergency transfer to the hospital with intent to take the resident back) to the Ombudsman on a monthly basis. The census was 92. During an interview on 4/16/24 at 11:07 A.M., Ombudsman F said the facility had not sent their monthly transfer notifications to the ombudsman office since November of 2022. Review of the email communication between the facility Social Service Director and the ombudsman office, dated 4/18/24 at 9:13 A.M., showed an admission/discharge log dated 4/1/24 through 4/18/24. During an interview 4/18/24 at 9:35 A.M., the Administrator said the social worker will be responsible to submit hospital transfer logs monthly to the Ombudsman. It has not been done since she started two weeks ago and that is about the same time the Social Service Director started. She is not sure when the last submission was completed. The Social Service Director just turned in a submission today for April 2024 and will be submitting them at the end of each month ongoing.
- Potential for harm · F2024-04-23 · tag F0640 — widespreadEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
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 encode and transmit resident assessment data within 7 days after a facility completes a resident's assessment for 12 of 19 residents investigated for MDS encoding and transmission, as indicated by the MDS showing in progress (Residents #22, #51, #54, #6, #53, #43, #2, #7, #29, #14, #30, and #23). The census was 92. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff) version 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, showed: -For all non-admission assessments, the MDS completion date must be no later than 14 days after the Assessment Reference Date (ARD); -For the admission assessment, the MDS Completion Date must be no later than 13 days after the entry date; -Encoding Data: Within 7 days after completing a resident's MDS assessment or tracking record, the provider must encode the MDS data (i.e., enter the information into the facility MDS software). 1. Review of Resident #22's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-23 · tag F0638 — patternAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
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 complete quarterly resident assessments for nine of 19 residents investigated for quarterly assessment completion (Residents #54, #6, #53, #43, #2, #7, #29, #14 and #23). The census was 92. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff) version 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, showed: -For all non-admission assessments, the MDS completion date must be no later than 14 days after the Assessment Reference Date (ARD); -For the admission assessment, the MDS Completion Date must be no later than 13 days after the entry date; -Encoding Data: Within 7 days after completing a resident's MDS assessment or tracking record, the provider must encode the MDS data (i.e., enter the information into the facility MDS software). 1. Review of Resident #54's medical record, showed: -admitted [DATE]; -A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 1/25/24 with ARD date 1/25/24, in progress. 2. 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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-23 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure eight of 10 randomly selected Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) received the required annual 12 hour resident care training. The census was 92. Review of the facility assessment, showed: -Staff training/Education and Competencies: Facility provides staff training/education and competencies through a variety of methods such as new employee orientation, impromptu small group training during the regular course of business, scheduled in-house in-services, webinars, classes, seminars, memos, Healthcare Academy, etc. on subjects that are either required for continued certification or in areas determined to need education or re-education. The facility provides or arranges for personnel to receive outside education to meet staff certification and re-certification requirements as applicable. The facility provides or arranges for training in the following subject areas. This is not an inclusive list: -Communication; -Resident's right and facility responsibilities; -Abuse, neglect, and exploitation; -Infection control; -Medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-23 · tag F0732 — patternPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to post the required nurse staffing in a prominent place, readily accessible to residents and visitors on a daily basis. The census was 92. Review of the facility assessment, showed: -Scheduling plan: 8 + full-time per unit on 6:30 A.M. to 2:30 P.M. shift; -8 + full-time per unit on 2:30 P.M. to 10:30 P.M. shift; -6 + full-time per unit on 10:30 P.M. to 6:30 A.M. shift. Observations from 4/17/24 through 4/19/24 and 4/22/23 and 4/23/24, showed a board on the wall behind the front desk reception desk. The board contained categories for date, census, total number and actual hours worked by Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN), and Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) per shift; -On 4/17/24 at 10:10 A.M., 4/18/24 at 6:20 A.M., and 4/19/24 at 6:44 A.M., showed a date of 4/4/24 and census of 92. There was no documentation of the total number and actual hours worked by RNs, LPNs, and CNAs per shift; -On 4/22/24 at 12:35 P.M. and 4/23/24 at 8:59 A.M., showed a census of 92. The date showed only the month 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 · Ecited before2024-04-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow acceptable standards of practice for infection prevention and control when staff failed to change gloves while administering medication via an enteral nutrition device (feeding tube) and left suction equipment at the bedside uncovered for one resident (Resident #1), and not testing new hire employees for Tuberculosis (TB) per their policy for eight of eight employees sampled. The census was 92. 1. Review of the facility's Administration of Medications policy, dated 8/24/23, showed: -The facility will ensure medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order to address residents' diagnoses and signs and symptoms. Review of the facility's Enteral Nutrition Therapy policy, dated 8/8/23, showed: -The facility will provide bolus enteral nutrition therapy in accordance with physician orders and professional standards of practice. This facility will utilize the Lippincott procedures, Enteral tube feeding, gastric; -Lippincott Nursing Procedures, Ninth Edition, 2023, page 295 Enteral tube…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-23 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 complete a comprehensive resident assessment for one of 12 residents investigated for comprehensive assessment completion (Resident #30). The census was 92. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff) version 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, showed: -For all non-admission assessments, the MDS completion date must be no later than 14 days after the Assessment Reference Date (ARD); -For the admission assessment, the MDS Completion Date must be no later than 13 days after the entry date; -Encoding Data: Within 7 days after completing a resident's MDS assessment or tracking record, the provider must encode the MDS data (i.e., enter the information into the facility MDS software). Review of Resident #30's medical record, showed: -admitted [DATE]; -An annual MDS assessment, dated 4/1/24 with ARD date 2/24/24, in progress. During an interview on 4/22/24 at 10:09 A.M., 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 · D2024-04-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had complete, accurate and individualized care plans to address specific needs of the residents for two of 19 sampled residents (Residents #175 and #59) and one of three sampled closed records (Resident #174). The census was 92. 1. Review of Resident #175's medical record showed: -admitted on [DATE]; -Diagnoses included encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the skin and subcutaneous tissue (deepest layer of the skin), severe sepsis (complication of an infection) without septic shock (widespread infection causing organ failure and dangerously low blood pressure), iron deficiency anemia (low red blood cells) secondary to blood loss, unspecified open wound left leg, necrotizing fasciitis (serious bacterial infection that destroys tissue under the skin), muscle weakness, and difficulty walking. Review of the resident's electronic Physician's Orders Sheet (ePOS), dated April 2024, showed: -An order dated…
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 · D2024-04-23 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed ensure a safe resident discharge to the community by failing to ensure referrals to local contact agencies and orders for medical equipment were sent timely for one of two residents reviewed with an order to discharge home (Resident #174). The resident was discharged without home health set up or durable medical equipment after a change in the discharge date . This has the potential to affect all residents who discharge from the facility. The census was 92. Review of the facility's Discharge Plan policy, reviewed 8/9/23, showed: -Policy: The discharge planning process will address each resident's discharge goals and needs including caregiver support and referrals to local contact agencies, as appropriate, and involves the resident and if applicable, the resident representative and the interdisciplinary team in developing the discharge plan; -Procedure: Identify the patient's needs and goals regarding discharge upon or as soon as practicable after…
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 · D2024-04-23 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services related to communication, by failing to provide speech assistive devices for one of one sampled resident (Residents #32) who is deaf. The facility also failed to ensure staff were knowledgeable on how to locate information regarding how the resident communicated with staff. The census was 92. Review of Resident #32's quarterly assessment Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 1/14/24, showed: -Hearing highly impaired- absence of useful hearing; -Diagnoses included stroke, high blood pressure, and seizures; -No hearing aid or other hearing appliances used. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 5/30/19, showed: -Focus: I have a hearing deficit/deaf and I have difficulty understanding. I prefer to have an American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter to assist me with understanding; -Goal: My needs will be anticipated and met by staff by next review date,…
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 before2024-04-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one resident with chronic wounds (Resident #4). The resident readmitted from the hospital on 3/29/24. Hospital records indicated wounds present to the left knee. The facility admission nursing assessment identified open areas on the left knee and lower extremities. The facility did not complete a full wound assessment until 4/3/24. Treatment orders were not obtained for the left plantar (foot) until 4/11/24 and left knee until 4/19/24. The census was 92. Review of the facility's Skin Integrity and Pressure Ulcer/Injury prevention and Management policy, dated 10/3/19 and last revised 8/25/21, showed: -Provide associates and licensed nurses with procedures to manage skin integrity, prevent pressure ulcer/injury (skin injuries as a result of prolonged pressure or friction), complete wound assessment/documentation, and provide treatment…
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 · D2024-04-23 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
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 that residents receive proper treatment to maintain vision when staff failed to make transportation arrangements for one sampled resident (Resident #224) out of 19 sampled residents, to go to a follow-up appointment for eye surgery and failed to reschedule the appointment after it was missed. The census was 92. Review of the facility's Transportation Coordination and Services Policy, issued 1/27/23 and reviewed on 7/17/23, showed: -Policy: The facility will assist residents in making necessary appointments for services not provided in the facility and arranging for transportation to and from appointments; -Procedure: The facility will assist the resident and or resident representative in the making of necessary appointments, such as, but not limited to Medical Specialists, Laboratory and Vision Services; -The facility will provide transportation through facility transportation or through a contracted service. Review of Resident #224's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-23 · 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 residents were free from significant medication errors for one resident who did not receive his/her ordered routine insulin (Resident #29). The census was 92. Review of the facility's Administration of Medications policy, dated 4/24/19 and last revised 2/13/23, showed: -The policy will ensure medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order to address residents' diagnoses and signs and symptoms; -Medication error- this means the observed or identified preparation or administration of medications or biologicals which is not in accordance with: -Physician order; -Manufacturer's specifications regarding the preparation and administration of the medication or biologicals; -Accepted professional standards and principals which apply to professionals providing services; -Significant medication error- this means one which causes the resident discomfort or jeopardizes his or her health and safety. Significance may be subjective or relative depending on the individual situation 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 · Dcited before2024-04-23 · 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 stored per acceptable standards of practice for one of four medication carts reviewed and one of one treatment cart reviewed. The medication cart contained insulin pens not labeled when removed from refrigeration to indicate when they expire. The treatment cart contained ointments for 2 residents (Residents #74 and #224) with the cap off. The facility had 10 medication/treatment carts. The census was 92. Review of the facility's Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biologicals policy, dated 12/1/07 and last revised 8/7/23, showed: -This policy sets forth the procedures relating to the storage and expiration dates of medications, biologicals, syringes, and needles; -Facility should ensure that medications and biologicals that have an expiration dates on the label, have been retained longer that recommended by manufacturer or supplies guidelines, or have been contaminated or deteriorated, are stored separate from other medication until destroyed or returned 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 · Dcited before2024-02-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received care consistent with professional standards. One resident (Resident #4) did not have his/her treatments completed as per physician orders to his/her vascular wounds, and one resident (Resident #3) did not have a treatment on his/her breasts and no follow up skin assessments were completed to ensure the resident's wound was healing. The sample was five. The census was 87. Review of the facility's Skin Integrity and Pressure Ulcer/Injury Prevention and Management Policy, review date, 3/31/23, showed: -Based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, the facility must ensure that: -A skin assessment/inspection occurs on admission/readmission. Skin observations also occur throughout points of care provided by Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) during Activities of Daily living (ADL, bathing, dressing and incontinent care). Any changes or open areas are reported to the nurse; CNAs will also report to the nurse if a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-14 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (Resident #5 and Resident #1) with pressure wounds (skin or soft tissue injury that develops with prolonged periods of pressure over specific areas of the body) received the necessary treatments and services to promote healing. The sample size was five. The census was 87. Review of the facility's Skin Integrity and Pressure Ulcer/Injury Prevention and Management Policy, review date, 3/31/23, showed: -Based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, the facility must ensure that: -A resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers and does not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they were unavoidable; -A resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing; -Procedure:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-03-30 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to protect residents' rights to be treated with dignity and respect for one resident (Resident #8) who was talked to in a harsh tone and told to go to his/her room and had tissues grabbed out of his/her hand. In addition, staff failed to provide privacy during care for three residents (Residents #38, #25, #23). The census was 52. Review of the Resident Rights, [NAME] of Rights, provided to residents upon admission to the facility, showed: -The resident has a right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with the access to persons and services inside and outside the facility; -The resident has the right to exercise his or her rights as a resident of the facility and as a citizen or resident of the United States; -Residents have the right to be free of interference, coercion, discrimination and reprisal from the facility in exercising his or her rights and to be supported by the facility in the exercise of his or her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-03-30 · tag F0569 — patternNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
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 residents and/or responsible parties were notified in a timely manner when a resident's account was within the $200 Social Security (SSI) limit ($4,835.00) or when the resident's account was over the SSI limit ($5,035.00). This affected 10 residents reviewed who received Medicaid benefits (Residents #303, #304, #27, #43, #8, #305, #26, #306, #307 and #17). The census was 52. Review of the facility's Management of Resident's Funds policy, undated, included: -Policy: It is the policy of the facility that residents may choose the facility to manage all or part of their financial affairs; -Procedure: The facility will notify each resident that receives Medicaid benefits when the amount in the account reaches $200 less than that which is allowed by the state Medicaid regulations. 1. Review of Resident #303's trust account, showed: -On 2/28/22, he/she had $8,441.33 in his/her account; -No letter showing the facility notified the resident or responsible party that he/she was within $200 of the SSI limit or over the limit.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-30 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their transfer/discharge policy by not providing the resident and/or their representative the written transfer notice at the time of the resident's facility initiated transfer, for three of five residents investigated for discharge. (Residents #252, #36 and #45). The census was 52. Review of the facility's Transfer/Discharges Policy, dated 5/6/19, showed: -Before a facility transfers or discharges a resident, the facility must-notify the resident and the resident's representative(s) of the transfer or discharge and the reason for the move in writing and in a language and manner they understand 1. Review of Resident #252's medical record, showed: -admission date: 9/29/21; -discharged to the hospital: 10/8/21; -readmission to the facility: 10/14/21. Review of the resident's nurses notes, dated 10/8/21 through 10/14/21, showed on 10/8/21 at 5:45 P.M., the doctor was notified of the residents fall and a new order was received to send the resident to the hospital. At 6:05 P.M., the family was notified. -There was no…
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 · E2022-03-30 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform the resident and/or resident representative of the bed hold requirements at the time of transfer to the hospital for various medical reasons for three of the five residents investigated for bed hold notices. (Resident #252, #36 and #45). The census was 52. Review of the facility's Bed-hold/Room Reservation Policy, dated 5/2/19, showed: -Policy: The Bed-hold policy should be given upon admission, upon transfer of a resident to the hospital (if in an emergency within 24 hours), or if the resident goes on therapeutic leave of absence; -Procedure: Bed hold policies will be provided and explained to the resident or responsible party upon admission and explained to the patient before each temporary absence; -Before the resident transfers to the hospital or the resident goes on a therapeutic leave, the facility will provide written information to the resident or representative or responsible party that specifies: in case of emergency transfer, notice at the time of transfer means that the family, surrogate or responsible…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed physician's orders and/or facility standing orders by failing to notify physicians when resident's blood glucose levels exceeded the parameters. The facility identified 14 residents with orders for routine blood glucose levels. Of those 14, two had blood glucose levels that exceeded physician orders and/or facility standing orders and problems were identified with both. (Residents #26 and #10). Problems were identified with one of one discharged resident with orders for routine blood glucose levels. (Resident #301). In addition, the facility failed to ensure one resident received their tube feeding formula as ordered, failed to identify the correct arm for taking blood pressures for one resident with a dialysis shunt, failed to ensure one resident using oxygen and a continuous positive airway pressure (c-pap) machine had orders for the oxygen and c-pap machine, and failed to discontinue one resident's order 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 · E2022-03-30 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual activities, designed to meet the interests and preferences for one resident, Resident #13. The facility failed to ensure there was a current activities scheduled in the evenings and on weekends and failed to ensure scheduled activities occurred. The facility also failed to provide meaningful and appropriate one on one (1:1) activities. The facility identified 16 residents that received 1:1 activities. Of those 16, five were sampled and problems were identified with three residents (Residents #32, #23, and #17). The census was 52. Review of the facility Therapeutic Activities Program policy, reviewed on 5/18/20 and revised on 11/2/21, showed: Federal Regulation: -The facility must provide, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-03-30 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. Out of 26 opportunities observed, 3 errors occurred resulting in a 11.53% error rate (Residents #251, #41 and #26). The census was 52. Review of the facility's Administration of Medications policy, revised 7/14/21, showed -All medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order to address residents' diagnoses and signs and symptoms; -Medication error means the observed or identified preparation or administration of medications or biologicals are not in accordance with: -The prescriber's orders; -Manufacturer's specifications regarding the preparation and administration of the medication or biological; -Acceptable professional standards and principles, which apply to professionals providing services; -A physician order that includes dosage, route, frequency, duration and other required considerations including the purpose, diagnosis or indication for use is required for administration of medication. 1. Review of Resident #251's electronic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted practices to include storage of insulin, dating medications when opened, and ensuring prescription medications were labeled with the residents name and stored with the cap on the medication, and treatment carts locked when not in use. The facility identified two medication rooms, four medication carts and three treatment carts at the time of survey. Issues were found with one of one medication room observed, two of two medication carts observed and three of three treatments carts observed. The census was 52. Review of the facility's Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biologicals, Syringes and Needles policy, dated 10/28/19, showed: -Procedure: facility should ensure that all medications and biologicals, including treatment items, are securely stored in a locked cabinet/cart or locked medication room that is inaccessible by residents and visitors; -Facility should ensure that medications and biologicals, once…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy on communicable disease by failing to ensure newly hired staff received the Mantoux tuberculin skin test (TST, used to test for latent tuberoses (TB) infection) two step as required for eight of 10 sampled staff hired within the past year. The census was 52. Review of the facility's tuberculosis testing and screening policy, revised 5/7/21, showed: -Purpose: To promote resident/associate safety and wellbeing by screening associates for TB and initiating appropriate follow-up; -New associates or volunteers who have been made a conditional offer shall be screened for the presence of infection through the following measures; -The facility should perform the TST two-step procedures; -Individuals with no documented history of TST skin test within the last 12 months will undergo the two step procedure. 1. Review of Activity Assistant F's employee file, showed: -Date of hire 11/4/21; -Employment ended 12/3/21; -No TST documentation provided. 2. Review of Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) H'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 · D2022-03-30 · 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 ensure residents wore positioning devices as ordered to prevent loss in range of motion for one resident with limited range of motion. The staff failed to ensure one resident wore splint as ordered and/or document and address when the resident refused to wear the devices (Resident #17). For one of four residents sampled for restorative services. The census was 52. Review of the facility's Restorative Nursing policy, revised 8/7/21, showed: -The facility is responsible for providing maintenance and restorative programs as indicated by the resident's comprehensive assessment to achieve and maintain the highest practicable outcome; -Restorative Nursing Functions can be within one of the following categories: -Range of Motion (Active and Passive); -Splint or brace assistance; -Bed mobility; -Transfers; -Walking; -Dressing and/or grooming; -Eating and /or swallowing; -Amputation/prosthesis care; -Communication; -Toileting program; -Bladder Retraining. -The licensed nurse will conduct an evaluation on a routine…
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 before2022-03-30 · 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 residents are free of any significant medication errors for one resident (Resident #251) who missed a blood pressure medication for three days when it was not reordered from pharmacy timely. This resulted in the resident's blood pressure being elevated. The census was 52. Review of the facility's Administration of Medications policy, revised 7/14/21, showed -All medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order to address residents' diagnoses and signs and symptoms; -The facility must ensure that its residents are free of any significant medication errors; -Medication error means the observed or identified preparation or administration of medications or biologicals are not in accordance with: -The prescriber's orders; -Manufacturer's specifications regarding the preparation and administration of the medication or biological; -Acceptable professional standards and principles, which apply to professionals providing services; -Significant medication error means one which causes 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 · D2022-03-30 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices to ensure a resident's closed medical record was readily accessible for one resident. (Resident #301). This failure resulted in a delay of the survey process due to being unable to fully complete a complaint investigation. The census was 52. Review of Resident #301's medical record, reviewed on 3/25/22, showed an April 2020 laboratory result not found in the electronic medical record (EMR). During an interview on 3/25/22 at 2:00 P.M., administrator was asked to provide the resident's medical record. The administrator said the laboratory would not give the facility the requested information. The resident's full closed record was at their contracted medical records facility. She could get the records but the process would take a couple of days before the records arrive to the facility. During an interview on 3/28/22 at 1:00 P.M., the facility said they had still not received the requested medical record. During 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 · D2022-03-30 · tag F0888 — isolatedEnsure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their staff vaccination policy for COVID-19. The facility had 66 employees. Of those 66, two employees were not fully vaccinated and without an exemption or medical delay, by the March 15, 2022 deadline. This resulted in 3.1% of facility staff who did not meet the requirement for staff vaccination. The facility did not have any positive resident cases in the four weeks preceding the onsite survey. Additionally, the facility failed to implement their policy related to additional precautions to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 for unvaccinated employees when two unvaccinated employees failed to wear an N-95 mask as directed by facility policy. The census was 52. 1. Review of the facility's Covid-19 (Sars-CoV-2) Vaccination Program Policy for Associates Policy, revised 2/23/22, showed: -Covid-19 Federal Mandate Secondary for Missouri includes: -(Initial Deadline) February 13, 2022 - Policies and procedures are developed and implemented for ensuring all facility staff, regardless of clinical responsibility or resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$15,646 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $15,646 — penalty dated 2024-10-21
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 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 | 4 of 5 | 3.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 193; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CROOKS, JOANNA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/19/2009 |
| PRESTON, FORREST | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/01/1994 |
| CROSS, CINDY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/28/1993 |
| SWANKER, RICHARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/01/2011 |
| THURMOND, JOAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/01/2002 |
| LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/23/1995 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.
1 organizational owner 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 72% 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 $755K 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 265610. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-16, 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.