E W Thompson Health & Rehabilitation Center
975 Mitchell Road, Sedalia, MO 65301 · Non profit - Corporation · 66 certified beds · (660) 851-0668 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2025
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 | 23.9% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.3% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.1% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 8.3% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.5% | 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 | 7.0% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 19.1% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 28.4% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.3% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.0% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 14.2% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.6% | 23.5% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.1% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 82.2% | 63.5% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.4% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.8% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.85 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.61 | 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.
60.4% 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 223 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 50.5% 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 107 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 0.09 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 5% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% 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 | 60.4%CMS range 53.8–66.2 | 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 | 9.2%CMS range 6.1–13.0 | 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 | 50.5% | 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 | 48.6% | 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 | 35.5% | 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 | 96.8% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 0.7% | 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 4.6–12.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.88 | 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 66 beds and averages 58.1 residents a day — about 88% 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 5.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.68 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 5.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.06 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 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 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-09 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to meet professional standards of practice when staff failed to document medications as administered for two residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) and failed to complete treatments as ordered for one resident (Resident #2). The facility census was 59.1. Review of the facility's Administering Medications policy, dated 12/2012, showed staff are directed:-Medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed;-If a drug is withheld, refused, or given at a time other than the scheduled time, the individual administering the medication shall initial and circle the Medication Administration Record (MAR) space provided for that drug and dose;-The individual administering the medication must initial the resident's MAR on the appropriate line after giving each medication and before administering the next ones. 2. Review of Resident #1's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], a federally mandated assessment tool,…
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 · D2026-03-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to administer nutritional supplements as ordered by the physician for one resident (Resident #1) out of one sampled resident. The facility census was 59.1.Review of Resident #1's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], a federally mandated assessment tool, showed staff assessed the resident as cognitively intact.Review of the resident's Physician Order Summary (POS), undated, showed an order for meal supplement health shakes.Review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated 02/01/26 through 02/28/26, did not contain documentation staff administered the resident's nutritional supplemental health shake as directed on 02/01/26, 02/03/26, 04/05/26, 02/07/26, 02/08/26, 02/09/26, 02/11/26-02/15/26, and 02/19/26.During an interview on 03/09/16 at 11:47 A.M., the administrator said staff are directed to document completed supplemental shakes, or refusal, in the resident's medical record. He/She said if the resident refused…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-01 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure one resident (Resident #1) remained free from verbal and emotional abuse when Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) B demanded multiple times for the resident to perform his/her toileting independently although he/she was unable to perform, and aggressively pulled resident under the arm to stand him/her up without a gait belt. The facility census was 60. The administrator was notified on 5/1/25 of past Non-Compliance, which occurred on 4/28/25 when staff reported the allegation. Staff immediately suspended CNA B pending the results of the investigation, assessed the resident for physical and psychological harm, conducted an investigation, in-serviced staff on abuse and neglect, and terminated the employee on 4/25/25. Review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation- Reporting and Investigating policy, date September 2022, showed all reports of resident abuse to include injuries of unknown origin, neglect, exploitation, or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-01-22 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility staff failed to perform hand hygiene as often as necessary using approved techniques to prevent cross-contamination. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Food and Nutrition Services Hand Washing policy, dated 01/01/07, showed the policy directed staff to wash their hands: -During food preparation; -When switching between raw food and work with ready-to-eat food; -Before donning gloves for working with food; -After handling soiled utensils or equipment; -After engaging in other activities that contaminate the hands. Review showed the procedure for handwashing listed as: -Rinse hands under clean, running, warm water; -Apply a cleaning compound; -Rub together vigorously for approximately 10 to 15 seconds; -Rinse thoroughly under clean, running, warm water; -Shut off the water faucet without contaminating the clean hands (id est, by using a paper towel). Review of the facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy, dated August 2015, showed The facility considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent 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 · F2025-01-22 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to electronically submit to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), complete and accurate direct care staffing information to the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) data on the schedule specified by CMS from January 1, 2024, through July 31, 2024. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility's Reporting Direct Care Staffing Information (Payroll-Based Journal) policy, revised August 2022, showed: -Direct care staffing information is reported electronically to CMS through the PBJ; -Compete and accurate direct care staffing information is reported electronically to CMS through the PBJ system in a uniform format specified by CMS; -For auditing purposes, reported staffing information is based on payroll records, invoices, tied back to a contract, or other verifiable information; -Data is submitted only by designated personnel with training on the PBJ user interface; -Direct care staffing information is submitted on the schedule specified by CMS, but no less frequently than quarterly; -Staffing information is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-22 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% out of 25 opportunities observed. Four errors occurred, resulting in a 16% error rate, which affected four residents (Residents #22, #36, #47 and #64) of six sampled residents. The facility census was 60. 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Insulin Administration Policy, not dated, showed nursing staff will have access to specific instructions (from manufacturer if appropriate) on all forms of insulin delivery system(s) prior to their use. Review of the Insulin Aspart Injection manufacturer insert showed: Before each injection small amounts of air may collect in the cartridge during normal use. To avoid injecting air and to ensure proper dosing: -Turn the dose selector to select two units; -Hold the Insulin Aspart FlexPen with the needle pointing up. Tap the cartridge gently with your finger a few times to make any air bubbles collect at the top of the cartridge; -Keep the needle…
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 · F2023-10-13 · 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 staff failed to designate a person to serve as the Director of Food and Nutrition Services with the appropriate qualifications, when the facility did not employ a qualified dietitian or other clinically qualified nutrition professional full-time. The census was 56. 1. Review of the facility's Dietician policy, dated November 2022, showed if a dietician is not employed 35 or more hours per week a director of food and nutrition services will be designated. This individual will: -be a certified dietary manger (CDM), or; -be a certified food service manager, or; -be nationally certified in food service management and safety, or; -have an associates (or higher) degree in food service management or hospitality, if the course includes food service or restaurant management from an accredited institution, or; -has two or more years of experience in the position of director of food and nutrition services in a nursing facility setting and has completed a course of study in food safety and management, by no later than October 1, 2023, and;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-10-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility staff failed to maintain proper food temperatures to prevent the spread of food borne illness. Facility staff also failed to properly clean and sanitize mechanically washed dishes to prevent cross-contamination. The facility census was 56. 1. Review of the facility's Food Preparation and Service policy, revised July 2014, showed: -the danger zone for food temperatures is between 41 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and 135 degrees F. This temperature range promotes the rapid growth of pathogenic microorganisms that cause food borne illness; -potentially hazardous foods include meats, poultry, seafood, cut melon, eggs, milk, yogurt and cottage cheese; -the longer foods remain in the danger one, the greater the risk for growth of harmful pathogens; The temperature of foods held in steam tables will be monitored by food service staff. Observation on 10/11/23 at 8:00 A.M., showed dietary staff served the breakfast meal from a portable steam table to the residents of Blue Ridge. Staff served cooked eggs, sausage and cheese on English…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide written information to the resident and/or the resident's representative of their bed hold policy at the time of transfer to the hospital for four residents (Residents #4, #19, #38, and #49). The facility's census was 56. 1. Review of the facility's Bed-Holds and Returns policy showed the policy did not direct staff to provide written information regarding bed-hold at the time of transfer. 2. Review of Resident #4's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 8/01/23, showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Moderate cognitive impairment; -discharged to the hospital from the facility on 07/15/23; -readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the resident's medical record showed the record did not contain written documentation staff notified the resident or the resident's responsible party of the facility's bed-hold policy. 3. Review of Resident #19's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-13 · 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, facility staff failed to maintain professional standards of care when they failed to complete neurological assessments (evaluation completed by staff for early detection of nervous system damage following head trauma) following unwitnessed falls for three residents (Resident #32, #43, and #49), and failed to administer medications according the the facility policy for three residents (Residents #37, #45, and #25). The facility census was 56. 1. Review of the facility's Neurological Assessment policy, revised October 2010, showed it directed staff as follows: -The purpose of the procedure is to provide guidelines for a neurological assessment: 1) upon physician order; 2) when following an unwitnessed fall; 3)subsequent to a fall with a suspected head injury; or 4) when indicated by resident condition; -The following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: the date and time the procedure was performed, the name and title 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.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review staff failed to ensure medications were stored in a safe and effective manner, by not ensuring medications were properly labeled and contained in their original package until time of administration on two medication carts, failed to discard expired medications from the medication room refrigerator, failed to store time scheduled controlled medications (medications which fall under United States (US) Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Schedules II-V and have a potential for abuse, ranging from low to high, and may also lead to physical or psychological dependence) in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment and failed to ensure medications carts were locked at all times. The facility census was 56. 1. Review of the facility's Storage of Medications Policy, revised August 2019, showed staff were directed to store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. Review of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website, www.accessdata.fda.gov…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review facility staff failed to use appropriate infection control procedures to prevent the spread of bacteria or other infectious causing contaminants during perineal care, when staff failed to perform appropriate hand hygiene, and glove changes for one resident (Resident #11), failed to ensure sanitary conditions for a catheter bag (a container to hold urine) by keeping the catheter off the floor for one resident (Resident #64), additionally staff failed to change oxygen tubing for three residents (Resident #4, #23, and #31) and failed to properly store nebulizer supplies for one resident (Resident #47). The facility census was 56. 1. Review of the facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy, revised August 2019, showed staff were directed to the following: -All personnel shall follow the handwashing/hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infections to other personnel, residents and visitors; -Wash hands with soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial)…
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 before2022-04-14 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility staff failed to ensure food temperatures remained out of the danger zone (the temperature range in which food-borne bacteria can grow, between the temperatures of 45 degrees Fahrenheit and 135 degrees Fahrenheit) during food service. The facility staff also failed to serve and store food in a manner to prevent cross-contamination and outdated use and to ensure staff used hair restraints while in the kitchen. The census was 55. 1. Review of the facility's Food Preparation and Service policy, dated 7/2014, showed: - The danger zone for food temperatures is between 41° F (degrees Fahrenheit) and 135° F. This temperature range promotes the rapid growth of pathogenic microorganisms that cause foodborne illness; - Potentially hazardous foods (PHF) include milk, yogurt, and cottage cheese; - The longer foods remain in the danger zone the greater the risk for growth of harmful pathogens. Therefore, PHF must be maintained below 41° F or above 135° F. Review of the facility's Food Service and Distribution policy, dated 11/28/17,…
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 · E2022-04-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure the residents' environment remained free of accident hazards when staff failed to prevent access to razors in shower rooms. Additionally, staff failed to store a bottle of antibacterial cleaning spray in a manner to prevent to access to residents. The facility census was 55. 1. Review of the facility's Hazardous Areas, Devices and Equipment Policy, dated July 2017, showed a hazard is defined as anything in the environment that has the potential to cause injury or illness. Examples of environmental hazards include, but are not limited to the following: -Sharp objects that are accessible to vulnerable residents; -Open areas or items that should be locked when not in use. Observation on 04/11/22 at 11:26 A.M., showed the shower room on Pine Valley, a secured unit for confused residents, unattended with the door propped open. Twenty razors sat on a shelf approximately four feet from the ground. Observation on 04/11/22 at 11:32 A.M.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-04-14 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to obtain informed consent for the use of side rails for eight residents (Resident #1, #20, #26, #36, #37, #40, #41 and #50) out of 15 sampled residents. The facility census was 55. 1. Review of the facility's Bed Safety Policy, dated December 2007, showed staff are directed to obtain consent for the use of side rails from the resident or the resident's legal representative prior to use. 2. Review of Resident #1's Annual Minimum Date Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 3/29/22, showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Severe Cognitive Impairment; -Diagnosis of stroke; -Totally dependent on staff for mobility, toileting, transfers, locomotion, personal hygiene, dressing, and showering; -Upper and Lower extremity impairment on both sides. Review of the resident's medical record, showed the record did not contain informed consent for the use of the side rails. Observation on 04/13/22 at 10:16 A.M., showed the 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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SYLVIA G. THOMPSON RESIDENCE CENTER, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 100% | since 07/01/2016 |
| SHUMAKE, WILLIAM J. | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 08/01/2016 |
| SIMON, DIANNE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2016 |
| WEST, KRISTEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 08/01/2023 |
| RESIDENTIAL HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/18/2025 |
| EPPERSON, KAREN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/26/2024 |
| FISCHER, JOYCE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2016 |
| WILLIAMS, AUDREA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/17/2023 |
| SYLVIA G. THOMPSON CHARITABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/26/2015 |
| FISCHER, ADAM | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/18/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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 265858. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-01-22, 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.