No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Willow Care Nursing Home

2646 State Route 76, Willow Springs, MO 65793 · Non profit - Corporation · 105 certified beds · (417) 469-3152 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (417) 469-3152 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Resident-funds citation (F0569)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — 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
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — 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 (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (59%) 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
CoxHealth1.7 mi
816 E Main St · (417) 469-3116 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
101 E Main St · (417) 469-3005 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
G&w Foods1.3 mi
204 N Ferguson St · (417) 469-2802 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Place of worship

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 2 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 fell from 4 to 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased16.1%18.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.2%5.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.1%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.0%2.3%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.2%18.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury9.6%4.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.0%17.4%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication31.5%25.6%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.1%90.9%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.2%4.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control26.0%17.8%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table35.0%23.5%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication10.0%2.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine60.9%63.5%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission28.1%26.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit21.6%13.7%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.642.111.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.712.331.80worse

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.

53.6% 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 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

53.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
50.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.16U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% 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 28 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 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF53.6%CMS range 38.5–67.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.3%CMS range 6.8–15.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge50.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge35.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge39.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified87.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened5.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 4.0–14.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.931.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.45
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.52
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.67
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.26
RN hoursweekends
58.6%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 105 beds and averages 68.4 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 37 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.67 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 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 3.04 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.93 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-08)
8
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-26)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · F2026-01-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 68.The facility did not provide a dietary cleaning rotation or food storage policy. 1. Observations on 1/05/26 at 10:35 A.M., and 1/07/26 at 10:22 A.M., of the kitchen showed:- The commercial dishwasher exterior with flaky white grime build-up and scattered debris on the floor beneath;- The floor and plumbing pipes below the dishwashing area counters and three compartment sinks with scattered debris, oily film, and brown grime build-up;- The wall with a dark colored grime build-up behind the dishwashing sink spray rinsing and disposal area and the floor below with an approximate 1inch (in.) in depth pooled area with a dark oily grime;- An approximate 8 foot (ft.) by 2 in. wall section in the backsplash area gapped open without caulking and with a black substance; - An approximate 24 in. x 24 in. ceiling diffuser (one 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-08 · tag F0569 — pattern
    Notify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to refund resident funds within 30 days of when a resident expired for seven residents (Residents #80, #81, #83, #84, #85, #86, and #87) out of a sample of eight residents, and failed to complete a final accounting of resident personal funds within 30 days of discharge for six residents (Residents #88, #89, #90, #91, #93, and #94) out of a sample of seven residents. The facility also failed to ensure residents and/or responsible parties were notified in a timely manner when a resident's account was within the $200.00 Social Security Income (SSI) limit ($6,068.80) or when the resident's account was over the SSI limit. This affected one resident (Resident #43) out of a sample of 17 residents reviewed who received Medicaid benefits. The facility census was 68. Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Trust Fund Account, undated, showed:- The staff of the facility will follow certain guidelines, as established by the state of Missouri and Social…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-08 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — pattern
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    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 maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) that included an antibiotic stewardship program to include an infection surveillance program and antibiotic use protocols. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility also failed to ensure correct antibiotic therapy duration for one resident (Resident #73) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 69.Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program, revised October 2018, showed:- Infection prevention and control program is developed to address the facility specific infection control needs and requirements identified in the facility assessment and the infection control risk assessment. The program is reviewed annually and updated as necessary;- Elements of the infection prevention and control program consist of coordination/oversight, policies/procedures, surveillance, data analysis, antibiotic…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide 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 maintained in the proper position for one resident (Resident #45) out of one sampled resident. The facility census was 68.Review of the facility's policy titled, Urinary Catheter Care, dated December 2025, showed:- Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor. 1.Review of Resident #45's medical record showed:- admitted on [DATE];- Diagnoses of urinary tract infection (UTI - a bacterial infection of the bladder and associated structures), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH - a noncancerous enlargement of the prostate), and retention of urine. Review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated January 2026, showed:- An order to drain the catheter bag every shift three times a day, dated 12/26/25;- An order for urinary catheter care every shift, dated 12/26/25;- An order to change the Coude (a type 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give 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 calendar 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 #15 and #56) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 72. The facility did not provide a policy regarding SNF ABN forms. 1. Review of Resident #15's medical record showed: - The resident was discharged from skilled Medicare services on 08/16/24, and remained in the facility; - No documentation the resident and/or the representative received a SNF ABN; - The facility failed to provide the SNF ABN form to the resident and/or the representative at least two calendar days before the skilled Medicare services ended. 2. Review of Resident #56's medical record showed: - The resident was discharged…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide 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 notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a transfer or discharge to a hospital, including the reasons for transfer for three residents (Residents #15, #34, and #70) out of six sampled residents. The facility's census was 72. The facility did not provide a policy for transfer/discharge notifications. 1. Review of Resident #15's medical record showed: - The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - No documentation of written notification to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the resident's transfer to the hospital on [DATE] and 05/13/24. 2. Review of Resident #34's medical record showed: - The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - No documentation of written notification to the resident and/or 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff) for four residents (Residents #22, #42, #52, and #63) out of 19 sampled residents and one resident (Resident #42) outside the sample. The facility census was 72. The facility did not provide a policy related to the accuracy of the MDS assessments. 1. Review of Resident #22's medical record showed: - Diagnoses of Parkinson's disease (a progressive disease of the nervous system marked by tremor, muscular rigidity, and slow, imprecise movement), dementia (a condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning, especially with impairment of memory and abstract thinking), and heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart doesn't pump blood as well as it should); - An order for hospice to evaluate and admit to hospice, dated 04/23/24; - A care plan, dated 05/17/24, addressed hospice. Review of the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure 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 failed to follow physician orders for two residents (Residents #9 and #20) out of 19 sampled residents. The facility census was 72. Review of the facility policy titled, Policy and Procedure Physician Orders, revised 07/01/17, showed: - Written/faxed orders require a physician signature in order to constitute a valid order; - The order should be clear, concise and contain the required components; - Orders that are missing required components, illegible or are unclear, will be clarified prior to implementation; - The licensed nurse is required to record the order in Point Click Care (PCC), the Physician Order Sheet (POS) and on the appropriate Medication Administration Record (MAR)/ Treatment Administration Record (TAR). 1. Review of Resident #9's medical record showed: - admission date of 01/12/22; - Diagnoses of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD - a mental health condition triggered by a terrifying event - either experiencing it or witnessing it; symptoms may include flashbacks, nightmares and severe anxiety, as…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide 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 obtain physician orders for placement and care of an indwelling catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) for one resident (Resident #323) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 72. Review of the facility policy titled, Policy and Procedures Physician Orders, dated 07/01/17, showed: - An order must be recorded in the medical record by the licensed nurse authorized to transcribe such orders; - Physician's orders must be documented clearly in the medical record. Review of the facility policy titled, Catheter Care, Urinary, dated September 2014, showed: - Notify the physician or supervisor if the catheter is accidentally removed. 1. Review of Resident #323's medical record showed: - Date of admission [DATE]; - Diagnoses of obstructive uropathy (a condition in which the flow of urine is blocked), epilepsy (a condition that affects the brain and causes frequent seizures), altered mental status, and generalized…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    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 one resident (Resident #9) out of one sampled resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive care plan, and the resident's choices, related to pain management. The facility's census was 72. Review of the facility policy titled, Pain Assessment and Management, dated March 2020, showed: - The purposes of this procedure are to help the staff identify pain in the resident, and to develop interventions that are consistent with the resident's goals and needs and that address the underlying causes of pain; - The pain management program is based on a facility-wide commitment to appropriate assessment and treatment of pain, based on professional standards of practice, the comprehensive care plan, and the resident's choices related to pain management; - Pain management is a multidisciplinary care process that includes assessing the potential for pain, recognizing the presence of pain, identifying the characteristics of pain, addressing the underlying…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 6 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0699 — isolated
    Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
    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 identify, assess, and provide supportive interventions for two residents (Resident #6 and #9) with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD - a mental health condition triggered by a terrifying event - either experiencing it or witnessing it; symptoms may include flashbacks, nightmares and severe anxiety, as well as uncontrollable thoughts about the event) out of two sampled residents. The facility's census was 72. Review of the facility policy titled, Trauma Informed Care, dated March 2019, showed: - The purpose is to guide staff in appropriate and compassionate care specific to individuals who have experienced trauma; - Nursing staff are trained on screening tools, trauma assessment and how to identify triggers associated with re-traumatization; - Caregivers are taught strategies to help eliminate, mitigate or sensitively address a resident's triggers; - Implement universal screening of residents for trauma; - As part of the comprehensive assessment, identify history of trauma or interpersonal…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolated
    Ensure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct at least twelve hours of nurse aide in-service education per year. This affected two out of two sampled Certified Nurse Assistants (CNA) (CNA D and CNA E). The facility's census was 72. Review of the facility's policy titled, In-Service Training Program, Nurse Aide, revised 08/2010, showed: - Each nursing assistant must attend, at a minimum, twelve hours of continuing education annually. 1. Review of CNA D's in-service record showed: - A hire date of 07/28/21; - A total of three hours and 30 minutes of annual in-service training for July 2023 through July 2024; - Less than twelve hours of in-service education for July 2023 through July 2024. 2. Review of CNA E's in-service record showed: - A hire date of 04/12/13; - A total of three hours and 30 minutes of annual in-service training for April 2023 through April 2024; - Less than twelve hours of in-service education for April 2023 through April 2024. During an interview on 09/26/24 at 9:00 A.M., the Administrator said the facility tracked CNA training hours by…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-02-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program for all residents when the facility failed to have a program in place for the prevention of the growth of Legionella bacteria (a bacteria which causes a respiratory disease when breathing in small droplets of water in the air that contain Legionella. It can become a health concern when it grows and spreads in human-made water systems) in the facility water supply or where moist conditions existed. The facility had a census of 73. Record review of the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) Toolkit for Legionella (also titled Developing a Water Management Program to Reduce Legionella Growth & Spread in Buildings), dated 03/25/2021, showed healthcare facilities need to actively identify and manage hazardous conditions that support growth and spread of Legionella by: -Identifying building water systems for which Legionella control measures are needed; -Assess how much risk the hazardous conditions in those water systems pose; -Apply control measures to reduce 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-10 · tag F0625 — pattern
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents received a written notice of the bed-hold policy upon transfer when staff failed to provide three residents (Residents #24, #32 and #39) written notices of the facility's bed-hold policy when transferred to the hospital. The facility census was 73. Record review of the facility's policy entitled Bed-Holds and Returns, revised March 2017, showed the following information: -Prior to transfers and therapeutic leaves, residents or resident representatives will be informed in writing of the bed-hold and return policy; -Residents may return to and resume residence in the facility after hospitalization as outlined in this policy; -Prior to a transfer, written information will be given to the residents and the resident representatives that explains in detail the rights and limitations of the resident regarding bed-holds; the reserve bed payment policy as indicated by the state plan (Medicaid residents); the facility per diem rate required…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-10 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of meaningful activities based on residents' interests and abilities when the staff did not provide activities scheduled, did not provide a calendar with times of activities noted, and did not track attendance of activities to evaluate if activities needs were being met for four residents (Resident #9, #25, #59, and #65). The facility's census was 73. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Group Programs and Activities Calendar (Revised January 2011), showed the following: -Group activities are available in this facility and an activities calendar is completed to inform residents, families and staff of the activity opportunities available; -The activities calendar states all activities available for the entire month; -Residents are encouraged to participate in all group activities, especially those that are best suited for their interests and physical, mental and emotional needs; -Smaller monthly activity…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-10 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — pattern
    Make 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 the facility failed to ensure call light cords were available to residents at all times when staff stored emergency call light pull cords where residents could not access the pull cord to call for staff assistance in the bathrooms of seven residents (Residents #15, #25, #30, #34, #41, #59, and #73). The facility census was 73 residents. Review of a facility policy and procedure entitled Answering the Call Light (Revised March 2021) showed the following information: -The purpose of the procedure is to ensure timely responses to the resident's requests and needs; -Upon admission and periodically as needed, explain and demonstrate use of the call light to the resident. Ask the resident to return the demonstration; -Explain to the resident that a call system is also located in his/her bathroom; -Be sure that the call light is plugged in and functioning at all times; -When the resident is in bed or confined to a chair be sure the call light is within easy reach 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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
WILLOW HEALTH CARE INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 12/02/2009
ALTER, SHIRLEYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/02/2009
CLARK, SHEILAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/02/2009
HEAD, BARBARAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 05/01/2017
MILLER, SHERRYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/16/1994
WILLIAMSON, JACKIEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/02/2009
OGDEN, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/20/1987

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$6.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+5.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$993K
Related-party expense16% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 75%Medicare 8%Other / private 17%

About 75% 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 $993K 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 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$230per resident / day
operating cost
$6,993per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$243per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MO

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Missouri
$6,741/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,400/mo
Assisted living

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 265335. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, 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.

What to do next