Stonebridge Westphalia
1899 Highway 63, Westphalia, MO 65085 · For profit - Corporation · 64 certified beds · (573) 455-2280 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — 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)
- nursing-staff turnover (57%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 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 | 4 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 | 35.3% | 18.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 14.5% | 5.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.5% | 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 | 11.3% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 32.9% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.7% | 25.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.6% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 37.1% | 17.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.1% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.7% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 55.2% | 63.5% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.1% | 26.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.1% | 13.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.71 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.25 | 2.33 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
38.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 44 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 48.0% 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 25 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 0.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 12% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 38.3%CMS range 28.7–51.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 6.0–14.8 | 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 | 48.0% | 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 | 52.0% | 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 | 48.0% | 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 | 96.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 3.2% | 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 | 3.2% | 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 | 5.7%CMS range 3.0–11.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.85 | 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 64 beds and averages 58.3 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.58 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 57% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
20 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-10-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to transfer three residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) in a safe manner, when staff did follow the facility's policy and procedures for the mechanical lift, which resulted with one resident (Resident #1) with fracture of facial bones and laceration of the head. The facility census was 50. 1. Review of the mechanical lift owner's manual, dated June 2015, showed staff are to move lift so that it is positioned directly over the individual and utilize leg opening function if required. Attach the straps of the sling to the hooks of the carry bar. Be sure to double check to ensure the straps are properly attached to the carry bar, and the individual is properly positioned in the sling prior to lifting. Observation on 10/12/23 at 10:48 A.M., showed a sign on the mechanical lift directed two staff required for the mechanical lift transfer. 2. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 develop and implement complete policies and procedures for the inspection, testing and maintenance of the facility's water systems to inhibit the growth of waterborne pathogens and reduce the risk of an outbreak of Legionnaire's Disease (LD) (a serious type of pneumonia (lung infection) caused by Legionella bacteria, which places all residents at risk of exposure which could lead to illness.The facility census was 54 with a capacity of 64.1. Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Survey and Certification (S&C) letter 17-30, dated 06/02/17 and revised on 06/09/17, showed:-The bacterium Legionella can cause a serious type of pneumonia called LD in persons at risk. Those at risk include persons who are at least [AGE] years old, smokers, or those with underlying medical conditions such as chronic lung disease or immunosuppression. Outbreaks have been linked to poorly maintained water systems in buildings with large…
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 · E2025-07-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet the medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for three residents (Resident #21, #29, and #48) out of three sampled residents who self-administered medication and kept medication at the bedside. The facility census was 54.1. Review of the facility's policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, dated October 2017, showed:-A person-centered, comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident;-The care plan will describe services that are furnished to attain of maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being;-Reflect the resident's expressed wishes regarding care and treatment goals. 2. Review of Resident #21's Quarterly Minimum Data Sheet (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for three (Resident #9, #10, and #15) out of five sampled residents who required assistance with bathing as scheduled. The facility census was 54. 1.Review of the facility's Bath, Shower/Tub policy, dated February 2018, showed the policy directed staff to document:-The date and time the shower/tub bath was performed;-The name and title of the individual who assisted the resident with the shower/tub bath;-All assessment data obtained during the shower tub/bath;-If the resident refused the shower/tub bath, the reason and the intervention taken;-The signature and title of the person recording the data. 2. Review of Resident #9's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 07/16/25, showed staff assessed the resident as:-Cognitively impaired;-No behaviors 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 · Ecited before2025-07-24 · 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 resident environment remained free of accident hazards when staff left medication at the bedside of three residents (Resident #21, #29, and #48) of eight sampled residents. The facility census was 54. 1.Review of the facility's Storage of Medication's policy, dated April 2007, showed drugs shall be stored in an orderly manner in cabinets, drawers, carts or automatic dispensing systems.Review of the Self-Administration of Medications policy, dated December 2016, showed self-administered medications must be stored in a safe and secure place, which is not accessible by other residents. If safe storage is not possible in the resident room, the medications of resident permitted to self-administer will be stored on a central medication cart or in the medication room. Staff will identify and give to the Charge nurse any medications found at the bedside that are not authorized for self-administration, for return to the pharmacy 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 · D2025-07-24 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide written information to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the bed hold policy at the time of transfer to the hospital for two residents (Resident #7 and #9) out of three residents sampled. The facility census was 54.1. Review of the facility's policy titled Bed Hold Notice Prior to Transfer, dated October 2017, showed:-In the event of a resident transfer to the hospital or the resident goes on therapeutic leave, the facility will provide written information to the resident and/or the resident representative regarding the bed hold;-The notice will be provided prior to leave, if possible;-In the event the notice is not provided prior to leave due to unforeseen circumstances, the notice will be provided within the requirements for such notices. Review of the facility's policy titled Transfer and Discharges, dated September 2017, showed: -Before the facility transfers a resident to a hospital or allows a resident to go on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-13 · 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 meet professional standards when staff did not complete weekly skin assessments per facility policy, for three residents (Resident #1, #2, and #3) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 49. 1. Review of the facility's Pressure Injury Prevention and Management Policy, dated October 2018, showed licensed nurses will conduct a full body skin assessment on all residents upon admission/readmission, weekly, and after any newly identified pressure injury. Findings will be documented in the medical record. 2. Review of Resident #1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 6/11/24, showed staff assessed the resident as: -Cognitively intact; -Impairment to both upper and lower extremities on both sides; -Substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and toileting; -Diagnosis of Pressure Ulcer of left buttock unstageable (a type of bed sore that occurs when prolonged pressure on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, staff failed to ensure medications were stored in a safe and effective manner, when staff failed to ensure medications were properly labeled and contained in their original package until time of administration on two medication carts. Staff failed to ensure multi-dose medications were dated when opened. Staff failed to discard expired medications in one medication room. Staff failed to store time scheduled controlled medications (drug or other substance that may cause addiction) in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment. The facility census was 50. 1. Review of the facility's Storage of Medication policy, revised 04/2007, showed drugs and biologicals shall be stored in the packaging, containers or other dispensing systems in which they are received. Drug containers that have missing, incomplete, improper, or incorrect labels shall be returned to the pharmacy for proper labeling before storing. Staff shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals. All such drugs shall be returned to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 perform appropriate hand hygiene, and glove changes during incontinence care for two (Resident #19 and #21) out of two sampled residents. Facility staff failed to perform appropriate hand hygiene, and glove changes during catheter care for one (Resident #4) out of one sampled resident. Facility staff failed to appropriately sanitize a multi-use glucometer (a device for monitoring blood sugars) between use for two residents (Resident #19 and #28) out of four sampled residents to prevent the spread of infection causing contaminants. The facility census was 50. 1. Review of the facility's hand hygiene policy, undated, showed all staff will perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection to other personnel, residents, and visitors. Staff will perform hand hygiene when indicated, using proper technique consistent with accepted standards if practice: -Hand hygiene is indicated and will be performed under the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-09 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet three (Resident # 5, #13 and #41) out of 13 sampled residents interest on the weekends. The facility census was 50. 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Life Enrichment Program, dated 10/21, showed this facility will provide an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities based on their comprehensive assessment, care plan, and preferences of each resident. Review showed staff were directed to: -Activities will be designed with the intent to enhance the residents sense of well-being, promote or enhance physical activities, promote or enhance cognition, and promote or enhance emotional health; -Events may be conducted in different ways, life enrichment programs to include a combination of large and small groups, one to one, and self-directed as the resident desires to attend; -Events will reflect residents' interest and age, be enjoyable, help the residents to feel…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-09 · tag F0847 — patternInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure the arbitration agreement was explained in a form and manner which correctly describes the arbitration process, or the option to decline the arbitration agreement. The census was 50. 1. Review of the facility's policies showed staff did not provide a policy for Arbitration Agreements. 2. Review of the facility's admission Packet showed a one page Arbitration Agreement did not contain a place to decline arbitration. During an interview on 05/08/24 at 2:12 P.M., the Social Services Director (SSD) said he/she goes over the admission packet with new residents and their family at admission. The SSD said he/she lets them know if they sign, it avoids going to court and cuts on court cost for everyone. The SSD said he/she explains even though they sign and agree to the arbitration, doesn't mean they can't go to court still. He/She said he/she doesn't typically read the arbitration agreement to the resident or residents' family, but tries to explain if they have questions. The SSD said he/she was not aware that 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 9 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-09 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to ensure call lights were within reach for three residents (Resident #6, #37, and #42) out of 13 sampled residents. The facility census was 50. 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Call Light Accessibility and Response, dated 9/21, showed all staff will be educated on the proper use of the resident call system, including how the system works and ensuring resident access to the call light. All residents will be evaluated on how to call for help by using the resident call system. Staff will ensure the call light is within reach of resident and secured, as needed. The call system will be accessible to residents while in their bed or other sleeping accommodations within the resident's room. The call system should be accessible to a resident lying on the floor. 2. Review of Resident #6 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment tool, dated 02/05/24, showed staff assessed the resident as follows: -Cognitively…
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 · F2022-12-02 · 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 54. 1. Review of the facility's Glove and Hand Washing Procedures policy, dated 2011 and posted in the kitchen, showed the policy directed staff to wash their hands upon entering the kitchen from any other location, after all breaks, between all tasks, before and after handling foods, and after touching any part of the uniform, face, or hair. Review also showed the policy directed staff to turn off the faucet with a paper towel after they wash their hands. Observation on 11/29/22 at 9:47 A.M., showed Dietary Aide (DA) N washed his/her hands at the handwashing sink and then turned the faucet off with his/her wet bare hands. Observation also showed [NAME] P washed his/her hands at the handwashing sink. Observation showed the cook turned the faucet off with a paper towel and then used the same paper towel to dry his/her hands before he/she continued to prepare food items for service…
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 before2022-12-02 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — widespreadMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility staff failed to ensure the resident's call lights were answered in a timely manner. The facility's census was 54. 1. Review of the facility's Call light Accessibility and Response policy dated, [DATE], showed staff were directed as follows: -All staff will be educated on the proper use of the resident call system, including how the system works and ensuring resident access to the call light; -Staff will report problems with a call light or the call light system immediately to the supervisor and/or the maintenance director and will provide immediate or alternative solutions until the problem can be remedied; -All staff members who see or hear an activated call light are responsible for responding. If the staff member cannot provide what the resident desires, the appropriate personnel should be notified. Review of the facility's electronic call light report between [DATE] at 12:15 P.M. and [DATE] at 10:17 P.M., showed the following: - [DATE] at 1:17…
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 · E2022-12-02 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure full time employment of a Director of Nursing (DON) since 9/26/22. The facility census was 54. 1. Review of the facility's Director of Nursing Services policy, revised August 2006, showed the following: - The Nursing services department is managed by the Director of Nursing Services. The Director is a Registered Nurse (RN), licensed by this state, and has experience in nursing service administration, rehabilitative and geriatric nursing; - The Director is employed full-time (40 hours per week). Review of the facility's Director of Nursing job description, undated, showed the following: - Interviews, hires, and trains employees; - Oversees facility in absence of higher-ranking management officials; - Maintains administrative authority, responsibility and accountability for the clinical team; - Investigate falls and allegations of abuse. Review of the Facility Assessment, last reviewed 4/28/22, showed the facility uses an infection control and antibiotic stewardship program developed by Pathways. The Quality…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-12-02 · 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, facility staff failed to store and label medication in a safe and effective manor in one of one medication storage rooms and in one of one medication storage carts. The facility census was 54. 1. Review of the facility's Storage of Medications policy dated, [DATE], showed the facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals. All such drugs shall be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed. Observation on [DATE] at 9:03 A.M., showed the 100 and 200 hall medication storage room contained: -Two 90 tablet bottles of 24 hour Loratadine 10 ml, with an expiration date of 11/22; -Two 100 capsule bottles of Vitamin E 90 mg, with an expiration date of 11/22. Observation on [DATE] at 9:25 A.M., showed the 100 hall medication cart contained: -One loose yellow tablet with a L stamped on it; -One loose brown tablet with 44291 stamped on it; -Two orange tablets with PC1 stamped on it; -One white tablet with 54612 stamped on it ; -One…
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 · E2022-12-02 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 maintain and follow current guidance and procedures for immunizations of residents against pneumococcal (infection caused by bacteria) pneumonia in accordance with national standards of practice for five (Residents #3, #7, #16, #18 and #25) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 54. 1. Review of the facility's Pneumococcal Vaccine Program policy, undated showed the following: -The pneumococcal vaccine program as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) varies for patients by age group. The recommendations were updated in 2016; -In 2016 there are two pneumococcal vaccines available for use in the United States; PCV13 and PPSV23; -Adults [AGE] years old or older who have already received a dose of PPSV23, should also receive a dose of PCV13 a year or more later; 2. Review of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - CDC, pneumococcal and influenza vaccine timing for adults, dated 4/01/2022, showed 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.
- No harm found · C2024-05-09 · tag F0575 — widespreadPost a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to post, in a form and manner accessible to the residents and resident representative, the required telephone number to the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) hotline (to report allegations of abuse and neglect), or a list of names, addresses, and phone numbers of the State Survey Agency (SSA). The census was 50. 1. Review of the facility's Facility Postings Policy, dated October 2017, showed the facility will post required postings in an area accessible to all staff and residents. The facility posting include a list of names, addresses (mailing and email), and telephone numbers of all pertinent State Agencies and advocacy groups to include but not limited to: -State Survey Agency; -Adult Protective Services. 2. Observation of the facility on 05/06/24 through 05/09/24, showed the facility did not post the name, address and toll free telephone number for the DHSS Abuse and Neglect Hotline or the SSA information in a form and manner accessible to residents or visitors. During an interview on 05/09/24…
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.
- No harm found · C2022-12-02 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to post the required nurse staffing information, which included the total number of staff and the actual hours worked, by both licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care, per shift, and on a daily basis. The facility staff also failed to keep the required daily staffing records for eighteen months. The facility census was 54. 1. Review of facility Nurse Staff Posting policy, dated September 2022, showed the following: - Our facility will post, on a daily basis for each shift, the number of nursing personnel responsible for providing direct care to residents; - The nurse staffing sheet will be posted on a daily basis and will contain the following information: - Facility name; - The current date; - Facility's current resident census; - The total number and the actual hours worked by the following categories of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift: Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed Practical Nurses/Licensed Vocational Nurses…
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.
- No harm found · C2022-12-02 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one or more individuals completed specialized training in infection prevention and control (IPC) prior to assuming the role of infection preventionist (IP) for the facility's infection prevention and control program. The census was 54. 1. Review of the facility's Infection Preventionist Policy dated September 2022 showed: -The facility will ensure the Infection Preventionist is qualified by education, training, experience or certification; -The IP must have obtained specialized IPC training beyond initial professional training or education prior to assuming the role and must provide evidence of training through a certificate(s) of completion or equivalent documentation. Review of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) training website showed: -The Nursing Home Infection Preventionist Training Course is made up of 24 modules and submodules addressing a variety of topics including an overview of the IPC program and the role of the infection preventionist, infection surveillance and outbreak management,…
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 STONEBRIDGE SENIOR LIVING — 12 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 | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LIERMAN, MARK | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 11/01/2021 |
| MILLER, BETH | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/17/2023 |
| BRIDGE REHABILITATION INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2024 |
| BUSEY CORPORATION | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/10/2023 |
| ELDERCARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/12/2008 |
| BERHORST, TRACY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/25/2024 |
| CIEGEL, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2022 |
| DOERHOFF, ERIC | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2021 |
| DUDENHOEFFER, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2014 |
| KNIGHT, KARA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2018 |
| THAYER, JEANNE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2021 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/25/2016 |
| LIERMAN FAMILY CO VI, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2008 |
| WIPFLI LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 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.
This home reported $823K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Missouri Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 265777. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, 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.