St Genevieve Nursing
1010 Ste Genevieve Drive, Sainte Genevieve, MO 63670 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 90 certified beds · (573) 883-5725 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- 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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 24.0% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.8% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.6% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 18.5% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 2.1% | 0.0% | 0.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 7.8% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.8% | 17.4% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.7% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.0% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.8% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.2% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.11 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.05 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
45.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 36 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 45.2%CMS range 29.3–60.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.0%CMS range 7.7–16.2 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 5.0% | 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 | 8.5%CMS range 4.8–14.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.80 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 54.1 residents a day — about 60% occupied, or roughly 36 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.07 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.14 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 2.72 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.21 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.21 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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN: Medicare requires SNFs to issue a SNF ABN to beneficiaries prior to providing care that Medicare usually covers, but may not pay for because the care is not medically reasonable and necessary or considered custodial) to two residents (Residents #31 and #44) out of two sampled residents who were discharged from Medicare Part A services with benefit days remaining and continued to reside in the facility. The facility's census was 57.Review of the Form Instructions: Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage, undated, showed:- When Medicare is not likely to cover a specific item or service, healthcare providers and suppliers must use this ABN to let the patient know they may be financially liable before they get the items or services;- Notifiers must deliver the ABN to the patient or their representative before providing the items or services; review the ABN with the patient or their representative 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 · D2026-03-26 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a transfer to the hospital and failed to provide a copy of the bed hold policy upon transfer to the hospital for four residents (Residents #8, #13, #40, and #44) out of four sampled residents. The facility also failed to notify the ombudsman (a trained advocate who investigates and resolves complaints made by or on behalf of residents in nursing homes, assisted living, and other residential care facilities) of the transfers. The facility's census was 57.Review of the facility's Bed Hold Policy and Agreement Form, revised February 2014, showed:- The purpose is to establish policy and procedure for the facility to notify the resident/responsible party of the Bed Hold Policy and Agreement To Pay Charges For Bed Hold. The facility is to execute an acknowledgement stating whether or not such resident desires to exercise his or her right to a bed hold. The policy should meet applicable…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program met at least quarterly, as evidenced by a lack of documented QAPI meetings over an extended period. This had the potential to affect all residents by limiting the facility's ability to identify and address quality of care and safety concerns. The facility census was 57. The policy provided by the facility did not address quarterly QAPI meetings. Review of QAPI meeting documentation, provided by the Administrator in Training, showed:- A QAPI meeting was held on January 21, 2025; - A QAPI meeting was held on April 22, 2025;- A QAPI meeting was held on May 20, 2025;- A QAPI meeting was held on February 10, 2026;- No documentation of QAPI meetings conducted between May 20, 2025, and February 10, 2026 (approximately eight months); - No documentation the QAPI program was implemented on a consistent and ongoing basis during this time period. During an interview on 03/26/26 at 12:15 P.M., the Administrator, Administrator in Training, and Regional Business…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices during catheter (a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) care for one resident (Resident #3) out of one sampled resident with a catheter and during wound care for one resident (Resident #33) out of one sampled resident with a wound. The facility's census was 57. Review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care, undated, showed: - Wash hands, gather equipment, and take to bedside; - Explain procedure to resident and screen for privacy; - Position resident; - Put on gloves; - Wash perineum (genital area) well with soap and warm water or peri-wipes, taking care to wash from front to back; - Clean area at catheter insertion site well, taking care not to pull on catheter or advance further; - All debris must be removed from catheter at insertion site; - Discard disposable equipment properly; - Position resident comfortably with call light in reach; - Wash hands. Review of the facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, revised 12/12/23,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided care for two residents (Resident #7 and #27) out of 14 sampled residents and three residents (Resident #32, #33, and #38) outside the sample, in a manner that maintained their dignity when staff stood while feeding the residents. The facility's census was 53. The facility did not provide a policy. Observation on 11/04/24 at 12:24 P.M. of the dining room showed: - Nursing Assistant (NA) B stood over Resident #32 to feed him/her; - Resident #7, #27, #33, and #38 sat together at a separate table; - Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) A stood over Residents #7 and #27 while assisting them with eating; - CNA A moved back to Resident #27 and stood over him/her while assisting him/her with eating; - CNA A moved back to Resident #27 and stood over the resident to feed him/her; - NA B then joined the table and stood over Resident #7 to feed him/her. - CNA A and NA B then both stood over Residents #38 and #33 to feed them; - NA B then returned to Resident #32's table and stood over him/her to assist…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy to ensure the Criminal Background Check (CBC), Employee Disqualification List (EDL - a listing of individuals who have been determined to have abused or neglected, misappropriated funds or property from a resident) and the Nurse Aide (NA) Registry were completed prior to the employment start date for two employees out of 10 sampled employees. The facility census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Prevention and Prohibition, revised 2021, showed: - The facility's abuse prohibition program includes the following seven components: Screening, Training, Prevention, Identification, Investigation, Protection, and Reporting/Response; - All employees will have criminal background checks, state and federal required checks, employment reference checks (previous and current), and license/certification confirmation. Review of the facility's policy titled, Corporate Compliance Process, undated, showed: - Criminal background checks are conducted on all potential employees and volunteers in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an error rate of less than five percent (%) when medications were given. There were 28 opportunities with two errors made, for an error rate of 7.14%. This affected one resident (Resident #13) out of 14 sampled residents. The facility census was 53. The facility did not provide a policy related to insulin administration. Review of Humalog Kwik Pen directions, revised July 2023, showed: - Pull the pen cap straight off; - Check the liquid in the pen; - Select a new needle; - Push the capped needle straight onto pen and twist the needle on until it is tight; - Priming the pen means removing the air from the needle and cartridge that may collect during normal use and ensures that the pen is working correctly; - To prime pen, turn the dose knob to select two units; - Hold pen with needle pointing up. Tap the cartridge holder gently to collect air bubbles at the top; - Push the dose knob in until it stops and 0 is seen in the dose window; - Insulin should be seen at the tip of the needle, if none is seen,…
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 before2024-11-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility staff failed to follow appropriate infection control practices while assisting two residents (Resident #7 and #27) out of 14 sampled residents and three residents outside the sample (Resident #32, #33 and #38) with their lunch meal. The facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. These practices had the potential to affect all residents who are served food from the kitchen. The facility's census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Dietary Policies, undated, showed: - Develop and maintains dietary services polices and procedures; - Assists with infection control and safety policies; - Ensures objectives and philosophy are understood and maintained by dietary staff; - Alerts administrator of existing or potential problem areas; - Ensures sanitary environment for food preparation and proper cleansing of equipment; - Ensure proper storage of foods to protect it from contamination. Review of the facility's policy…
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 before2024-11-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control practices for two residents (Resident #13 and #41) out of 14 sampled residents and one resident (Resident #14) outside the sample when facility staff did not perform hand hygiene between finger stick blood sugar (FSBS) checks and insulin (a hormone that lowers the level of glucose (a type of sugar) in the blood) administration and failed to disinfect the glucometer (a machine used to measure blood sugar) per the manufacturer's recommendations. The facility's census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Cleaning and Disinfecting Blood Glucose Meters, dated 2019, showed; - Apply gloves before performing a blood glucose test. Glucose monitoring, administration of insulin, and any other procedure that involves potential exposure to bodily fluids; - Remove gloves and perform hand hygiene; - Apply new gloves; - Thoroughly clean all visible soil or organic material (e.g. blood) from glucometer before disinfection; - Perform hand hygiene (i.e. hand washing with soap…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-09-14 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have a clinically qualified nutritional professional designated as the Food and Nutritional Service Manager for one of one food service kitchens, which prepared food for all residents. This deficient practice potentially affected all of the residents who were served food prepared by the facility. The facility's census was 52. Review of the facility's current employee list, dated 06/15/23, showed a hire date of 08/13/18 for the Dietary Supervisor (DS). During an interview on 09/13/23 at 3:00 P.M., the DS said he/she has worked for the facility about five years and has been the DS for about three years. The DS said he/she had started the certification classes, but did not finish them. The DS said the Administrator is supposed to help get him/her back in the class. The DS said he/she is not enrolled at this time and does not know when he/she will be enrolled. During an interview on 09/14/23 at 11:33 A.M., the Administrator said she would expect the DS to be certified after working for the facility for five years. 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 · Fcited before2023-09-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food under sanitary conditions. This deficient practice potentially affected all of the residents who were served food prepared by the facility. The facility's census was 52. Observation on 09/12/23 at 8:45 A.M. of the kitchen showed: - [NAME] crusty build up on top of the dishwasher; - Bucket of pot and pan detergent sitting on the floor under the dishwashing sink; - Bucket of sanitizer sitting in the floor under the handwashing sink; - Ice build up on the freezer door approximately 6 inches at the top right corner, ice build up approximately 6 inches on the bottom right corner of the freezer door, condensation on the outer flange of the freezer and condensation on the floor outside the freezer door. Approximately ¼ inch thick layer of ice on the floor inside the freezer approximately 1 foot wide x 4 feet in length. Approximately 4 inches in width x 7 inches in length icicle formation hanging down in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-14 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain quarterly Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings with the required members. The facility's census was 52. Review of the facility's Quality Assurance policy and procedure, undated, showed: - The Administrator will establish a Quality Assurance Committee that will coordinate the review of Quality Assurance activities within the facility organizational plan; - The Administration shall provide equipment, personnel, and support necessary to maintain the Quality Assurance program. 1. Review of the QAPI Quarterly Meeting sign in sheet, dated 04/18/23 and provided by the Administrator, showed the Infection Preventionist (IP) did not attend the meeting. 2. Review of the QAPI Quarterly Meeting sign in sheet, dated 07/27/23 and provided by the Administrator, showed the IP did not attend the meeting. During an interview on 09/13/23 at 11:11 A.M., the IP and Director of Nursing (DON) said the facility has no alternate certified IP. The DON is going to work on getting other staff certified so they will have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to COMMUNITY CARE CENTERS — 8 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 | 5 of 5 | 2.6 | +2.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 3.3 | +1.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEINER, CRAIG | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 01/22/2025 |
| WEINER, GINA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 01/22/2025 |
| GC ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/22/2025 |
| LEUNG, ERIKA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/22/2025 |
| SCHENCK, STEPHANIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/22/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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.
This home reported $404K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Missouri Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 265489. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-26, 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.