Riverways Manor
403 Watercress Road, Box 969, Van Buren, MO 63965 · For profit - Individual · 60 certified beds · (573) 323-4282 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 federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (22) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- about 22% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 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 | 23.7% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.6% | 5.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.3% | 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 | 6.9% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.0% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 40.4% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.7% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 13.1% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.6% | 17.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 41.8% | 23.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 2.2% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 66.7% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 31.6% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.2% | 13.7% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.45 | 2.11 | 1.67 | better |
| 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.
32.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 44.8% 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 29 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 0.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 13% 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 | 32.5%CMS range 19.8–50.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.9%CMS range 7.6–18.5 | 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 | 44.8% | 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 | 41.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 41.4% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 | 6.4% | 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 | 6.4% | 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 | 10.1%CMS range 6.3–16.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.11 | 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 60 beds and averages 43.2 residents a day — about 72% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 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 2.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.74 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as 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.
22 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to limit the use of as needed (PRN) psychotropic (medication that affect a person's mental state) medication orders for 14 days for one resident (Resident #46) out of three sampled residents, and failed to ensure an appropriate diagnoses for the use of an antipsychotic (medication that treats mental disorders characterized by a disconnection from reality) medication for one resident (Resident #40) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 46. Review of the facility's policy titled, Tapering Medications and Gradual Drug Dose Reduction, dated February 2025, showed: -The practitioner and staff identify symptoms for which a resident is receiving medication and monitor the resident for changes in those symptoms; -Behavior interventions are used to support the resident during and after GDR of a psychotropic medication. Review of the facility's policy titled, Psychotropic Medication Use, dated February 2025, showed: -Adequate indication for use…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure placement of the urinary indwelling catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) drainage bag and tubing was maintained for one resident (Resident #10) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 46.Review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care, Urinary, dated August 2022, showed:- Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor. 1.Review of Resident #10's medical record showed:- admitted on [DATE];- Diagnosis of urinary retention. Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated January 2026, showed:- An order to change the Foley (a type of indwelling catheter) catheter 16 French (size of the catheter) 30 millimeter (ml) balloon and bag, monthly on the 8th using sterile technique, dated 01/08/26. Review of the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents in certified nursing homes), dated 01/15/26, showed:-…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain essential equipment in a safe and operable working condition. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 46.The facility did not provide a policy for equipment maintenance. The facility did not provide current invoices related to commercial electric range repairs. Review of the Electric Range Estimates showed:- On 07/09/25, an estimate for a replacement of the electric range was obtained, but no further action taken;- On 08/07/25, an estimate for a replacement of the electric range was obtained, but no further action taken. Observation on 01/19/26 at 10:30 A.M., of the kitchen showed:- One commercial electric range with no working burner elements. During an interview on 01/20/26 at 11:42 A.M., Dietary Aide (DA) F said the soup was warmed in the oven because the top burners did not work on the electric range. During an interview on 01/20/26 at 11:48 A.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) said the electric range stove top was not working properly. There were no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-27 · 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 treated residents with dignity and respect by leaving one resident (Residents #39) out of one sampled resident with his/her genitalia exposed to the public. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Dignity, revised February 2021, showed: - Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being. Level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem; - Residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times; - Staff promote, maintain, and protect resident privacy, including bodily privacy during assistance with personal care and during treatment procedures; - Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromise dignity are prohibited. Staff are expected to promote dignity and assist residents. Review of Resident #39's medical record showed: - admission date of 07/05/24; - Diagnoses of diabetes mellitus (DM - a condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), acquired absence of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-27 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to issue a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) to the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing at least two days before discharge from skilled services. This notice informs the beneficiary about potential non-coverage and the option to continue services with the beneficiary accepting the financial liability for those services. This practice affected two residents (Residents #20 and #43) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 47. The facility did not provide a policy regarding the SNF ABN. 1. Review of Resident #20's medical record showed: - Medicare Part A skilled services started on 05/07/24, and ended on 06/02/24; - The facility initiated the discharge from Medicare Part A Services with the resident's benefit days not exhausted and the resident remained in the facility; - Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) form, dated 05/31/24, was provided; - No documentation of the SNF ABN form was issued to the resident and/or the resident's representative. 2. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-27 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to document an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment completed by facility staff) for three residents (Residents #16, #29 and #39) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 47. Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Assessments, revised October 2023, showed: - The resident assessment coordinator is responsible for ensuring the interdisciplinary team conducts timely and appropriate resident assessments; - Information in the MDS assessments will consistently reflect information in the progress notes, plans of care and resident observations/interviews. 1. Review of Resident #16's medical record showed: - admission date of 11/01/21; - Diagnoses of cerebral infarction (a stroke), tremor (involuntary, rhythmic shaking or trembling that can affect one or more parts of the body), and cognitive communication deficit; - No side rail assessment; - Nurse's notes, dated 02/01/24-09/27/24, showed no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-27 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility to follow physician's orders for four residents (Residents #7, #16, #17 and #29) out of four sampled residents when the facility failed to ensure medications were available to administer to the residents. The facility also failed to ensure medications were administered within the prescribed time frame for two residents (Residents #25 and #41) out of nine sampled residents. The facility census was 47. Review of facility policy titled, Administering Medication, revised April 2019, showed: - Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame; - Medications are administered within one hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified or liberal medication passes; - The policy didn't address the time frame for ordering of medication refills. 1. Review of Resident #7's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated September 2024, showed: - Diagnosis of anxiety (persistent worry and fear about everyday situations); - An order for buspirone (antianxiety medication) 7.5 milligram…
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 · D2024-09-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess, care plan and monitor for efficacy for the use of a wheelchair seatbelt for one resident (Resident #26) out of one sampled resident. The facility census was 47. The facility did not provide a seatbelt policy. 1. Review of Resident #26's medical record showed: - admission date 02/07/23; - Diagnoses of cerebral palsy (a congenital disorder of movement, muscle tone, or posture due to abnormal brain development), muscle spasm, psychosis (a mental disorder characterized by disconnection from reality) not due to a substance or known physiological condition, and convulsions (sudden, irregular movement of a limb or of the body); - No documentation of an assessment for the use of a seatbelt. Review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility staff), dated 09/24/24, showed: - Cognition intact; - Impairment on both sides of upper and lower extremities; - Partial/Moderate assistance for eating; - Dependent for oral hygiene, toileting…
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 before2024-09-27 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a urinary indwelling catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) drainage bag was kept off the floor for two residents (Residents #29 and #39) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 47. Review of the facility policy titled, Urinary Catheter Care, revised August 2022, showed; - Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor. 1. Review of Resident #29's medical record showed: - admitted on [DATE]; - Diagnosis of neurogenic bladder (lack of bladder control due to a brain, spinal cord or nerve problem). Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated September 2024, showed: - An order for Foley (a type of indwelling catheter) catheter care every shift, dated 08/16/24; - An order to change the Foley Catheter, 16 French (Fr - the measurement used to measure sizes of urinary catheters) 30 cubic centimeter (cc) balloon monthly on the 16th using sterile technique on night shift,…
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 · D2024-09-27 · 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 infection control practices during disinfection of a facility glucometer (a device for measuring the concentration of glucose in the blood) used for glucose (the main type of sugar in the blood) monitoring for three residents (Residents #22, #25 and #31) out of three sampled residents. The facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices during catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) care for one resident (Resident #39) out of one sampled resident. The facility census was 47. The facility did not provide a policy on cleaning and disinfecting the glucometer. Review of the PDI Super Sani Cloths Manufacturer's Disinfection Directions showed: - If present, use a wipe to remove visible soil prior to disinfecting; - Unfold a clean wipe and thoroughly wet the surface; - Allow the treated surface to remain wet for two minutes; - Allow to air dry; - Dispose of the wipe after a single use. Review of the facility's policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, revised October 2023,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 12 citations
- Potential for harm · F2023-04-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 46. Record review of the facility's Kitchen Sanitization policy, revised November 2022, showed: - The food services area is maintained in a clean and sanitary manner; - All equipment, food contact surfaces and utensils are cleaned and sanitized using heat or chemical sanitizing solutions; - Ice machines and ice storage containers are drained, cleaned and sanitized per manufacturer's instructions; - All food will be labeled and dated. 1. Observations on 4/3/23 at 8:49 A.M., 4/3/23 at 3:49 P.M., and 4/4/23 at 8:27 A.M., of the kitchen showed: - The dish machine with a buildup of a white substance on the sides, the top and the front panel; - The Insinkerator waste disposal with exposed red, black and white wires and a missing protective covering under the sink; - The backsplash behind the waste disposal…
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 · E2023-04-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean and comfortable homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 46. Observations on 4/3/23 at 10:46 A.M., 4/4/23 at 9:12 A.M., and 4/5/23 at 10:12 A.M., showed: - A three foot (ft.) baseboard missing behind the door next to the bathroom located in room [ROOM NUMBER]; - A figurine, a decorative plaque, and a ceramic figurine on top of the light fixture above the bed located by the window in room [ROOM NUMBER]; - A four ft. baseboard missing in front of the Direct Supply Attendant weight scale located in the room behind the nurse's station; - A seven inch (in.) x 12 in. area of paint and sheetrock peeled off in front of the Direct Supply Attendant weight scale located in the room behind the nurse's station. Observations on 4/3/23 at 3:18 P.M., of the shower room located next to the beauty shop showed: - A shower drain cover broken and not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an order for code status was consistently documented throughout the medical record for two residents (Resident #30 and #48) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 46. Record review of the facility's Advanced Directives policy, revised [DATE], showed: - If the resident or the resident's representative has executed one or more advance directives (legal documents that allow you to spell out your decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time), or executes one upon admission, copies of these documents are obtained and maintained in the same section of the resident's medical record and are readily retrievable by any facility staff; - The Director of Nursing (DON) services or designee notifies the attending physician of the advance directives (or changes in the advance directives) so that appropriate orders can be documented in the resident's medical record and plan of care; - The resident's wishes are communicated to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-06 · 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 complete and notify in the proper timeframe, at least two calendar days before services were to end, the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) and the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) for two residents (Resident #1 and #38) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 46. 1. Record review of Resident #1's NOMNC and SNF ABN forms showed: - The resident admitted to skilled Medicare services on 2/21/23; - The facility electronically signed the forms with the resident's name on 2/21/23, date of admission to skilled Medicare services; - The resident discharged from skilled Medicare services on 3/2/23, and remained in the facility; - The facility failed to provide the NOMNC and the SNF ABN forms to the resident at least two calendar days before the skilled Medicare services ended and not on day of admission to the skilled Medicare services. 2. Record review of Resident #38's NOMNC and SNF ABN forms showed: - The resident admitted to skilled Medicare services on 2/23/23; - The facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to send copies of the notice of transfer or discharge to the representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman (a program that advocates for residents, provide information and help resolve problems) for four residents (Resident #13, #30, #35, and #37) out of four sampled residents. The facility's census was 46. 1. Record review of Resident #13's medical record showed: - admitted on [DATE]; - The resident transferred to the hospital for evaluation on 12/5/22, 12/11/22, and 1/4/23; - No documentation of the notice of transfers or discharge provided to the representative of the LTC Ombudsman. 2. Record review of Resident #30's medical record showed: - admitted on [DATE]; - The resident transferred to the hospital on 3/29/23; - No documentation of the notice of transfer or discharge provided to the representative of the LTC Ombudsman. 3. Record review of Resident #35's medical record showed: - admitted on [DATE]; - 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a federally mandated assessment tool completed by the facility) assessment for one resident (Resident #48) out of three sampled residents. The facility's census was 46. Record review of the facility's Resident Assessments policy, Revised March 2022, showed: - The resident assessment coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the appropriate resident assessments and reviews are completed; - A required MDS assessment is a significant change in status assessment; - A significant change in status assessment is a comprehensive assessment; - A comprehensive assessment includes the completion of the MDS, completion of the care area assessment (CAA) process, and the development of the comprehensive care plan; - The RAI provides detailed information on timing and submission of the MDS assessments. 1. Record review of Resident #48's medical record showed: - An admission date of 1/17/23; - admitted to hospice (health care focused on the quality of life of a terminally ill…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility staff, within the required timeframe) for one resident (Resident #12) outside the sample The facility's census was 46. Record review of the facility's Resident Assessments policy, Revised March 2022, showed: - Required Assessments are federally mandated, and therefore must be performed for all residents of Medicare and/or Medicaid certified nursing homes; - The resident assessment coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the appropriate resident assessments and reviews are completed; - The Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) provides detailed information on timing and submission of the MDS assessments. 1. Record review of Resident #12's medical record showed: - An admission date of 3/30/2020; - A quarterly MDS, dated [DATE]; - The facility did not complete a quarterly MDS for the resident within 92 days of the last MDS. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete and transmit Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility staff) tracking records within the required timeframe for four residents (Resident #4, #18, #19 and #46) outside the sample The facility's census was 46. Record review of the facility's Resident Assessments policy, dated March 2022, showed: - Required assessments are federally mandated, and therefore, must be performed for all residents of Medicare and/or Medicaid certified nursing homes; - The resident assessment coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the interdisciplinary team conducts timely and appropriate resident assessments and reviews according to the following requirements: admission assessments (comprehensive) and discharge assessment (return anticipated and return not anticipated); - The Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) provides detailed information on timing and submission of assessments. 1. Record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and closed record review, the facility failed to ensure a discharge planning process was in place which addressed goals and needs and involved the resident and/or the resident's legal guardian and the interdisciplinary team (IDT) (a group of health care professionals from diverse fields who work in a coordinated effort toward a common goal for a resident) in developing a discharge plan for one resident (Resident #50) out of two sampled discharged residents. The facility census was 46. Record review of the facility's Discharge Summary and Plan policy, revised October 2022, showed: - The post-discharge plan is developed by the care planning/interdisciplinary team with assistance of the resident and his or her family; - The resident/representative is involved in the post-discharge planning process and informed of the final post-discharge plan; - A copy of the evaluation of discharge needs, the post-discharge plan and discharge summary will be filed in the resident's medical record. 1. Record review of Resident #50's closed medical record showed: - An admission date…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and closed record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive discharge summary for one resident (Resident #50) out of two sampled discharged residents. The facility census was 46. Record review of the facility's Discharge Summary and Plan policy, revised October 2022, showed: - When a resident's discharge is anticipated, a discharge summary and post-discharge plan is developed to assist the resident with discharge; - The discharge summary includes a recapitulation of the resident's stay at the facility and a final summary of the resident's status at the time of the discharge in accordance with the established regulations governing the release of the resident's information and as permitted by the resident; - A copy of the evaluation of the discharge needs, the post-discharge plan and the discharge summary will be filed in the resident's medical record. 1. Record review of Resident #50's closed medical record showed: - The resident discharged to home on 2/24/23; - No documentation of a comprehensive discharge summary. During an interview on 4/6/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper care of the enteral feeding (the intake of food through a gastrostomy tube (G-tube) (a tube placed directly through the abdomen into the stomach) for one resident (Residents #8) out of a sample of one. The facility census was 46. Record review of the facility's Enteral Nutrition policy, revised November 2018, showed: - Adequate nutritional support through enteral nutrition is provided to residents as ordered; - The recommendation to initiate the use of enteral nutrition is based on the results of the comprehensive nutritional assessment, and is consistent with current standards of practice, the resident's advance directives, treatment goals and facility policies; - The nurse confirms that orders for enteral nutrition are complete; - Complete orders include the enteral nutrition product, delivery site, specific enteral access device, administration method (continuous, bolus, intermittent), volume and rate of administration, the volume/rate goals and recommendations for advancement toward these,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · tag F0924 — isolatedPut firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the handrails on the Red, Blue and Therapy Halls were properly maintained. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in these areas. The facility census was 46. 1. Observations on 4/3/23 at 11:01 A.M., and 4/5/23 at 4:13 P.M., showed: - A four foot (ft.) section of the handrail came out of the drywall when grabbed with minimal force located on the right side of the door by room [ROOM NUMBER]; - A two ft. section of the handrail came out of the drywall when grabbed with minimal force located on the right side upon entering the soiled utility room near the nurse's station; - A two ft. section of the handrail came out of the drywall when grabbed with minimal force located on the left side of room [ROOM NUMBER] near the fire extinguisher; - An 18 inch (in.) section of the handrail came out of the drywall when grabbed with minimal force located between the men and the women's public restrooms near the therapy room.…
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 CIRCLE B ENTERPRISES — 36 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 3.1 | +1.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 1.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
The other 35 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| THE PAMELA D BEDELL EXEMPT TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 10/31/2000 |
| BEDELL, DONALD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2001 |
| BEAIRD, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2022 |
| AGH1 LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/05/2025 |
| SOVEREIGN HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/06/2025 |
| RUBI, RODNEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2017 |
| SCOTT, AMANDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/11/2025 |
| BEDELL, BRYAN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/12/2025 |
| FG LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/02/2016 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/16/2021 |
| MID STATES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2010 |
| VAN DE VEN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2000 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 80% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $717K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Missouri Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 265363. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-21, 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.