MissouriO Fallon

Abbey Senior Health

206 North Main Street, O Fallon, MO 63366 · St. Charles County · 55 certified beds · avg 50 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 2011

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.13
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 9, 2023 · F-0689

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jul 24, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (29)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 11, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint
Sep 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Dec 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Oct 25, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 25, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost.
Oct 25, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss.
Oct 25, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Oct 25, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.
Oct 25, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Oct 25, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames.
Oct 25, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.
Oct 25, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Jun 9, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jun 9, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Jun 9, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies.
Jun 9, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Jun 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
Nov 7, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Nov 7, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
Nov 7, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly.
Nov 7, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 9).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
201940E
2023131G ▲
2024100F
202510D
202610E

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityMissouri avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.133.663.95top 7% in Missouri; top 11% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.790.490.69top 8% in Missouri; top 28% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.443.223.50top 8% in Missouri; top 13% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.470.330.48top 11% in Missouri; top 37% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)35.656.045.8top 6% in Missouri; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)27.347.842.9top 21% in Missouri; top 24% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.74, RN 0.73, weekend 4.10. Staffing rating: 5/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Abbey Health Group LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%10/31/2018
Brown, C ChristopherIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Abbey Health Group LLCOrganization5% or Greater Security InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Abbey Health Group LLCOrganizationGeneral Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Abbey Health Group LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Brown, C ChristopherIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Brown, C ChristopherIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Brown, C ChristopherIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Mount Carmel Seniro Living O'Fallon LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Mount Carmel Seniro Living O'Fallon LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2018
Patwardhan, ManishaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Patwardhan, ManishaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Garden View Care Center1.1 miO Fallon, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Delmar Gardens of O'Fallon3.7 miO Fallon, MO★★★☆☆2/5
Sunterra Springs Dardenne Prairie4.3 miDardenne Prairie, MO★★☆☆☆2/5
Cottages of Lake St Louis4.9 miLake Saint Louis, MO★★★★☆4/5
St Peters Post Acute4.9 miSaint Peters, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5
Ignite Medical Resort St Peters4.9 miSaint Peters, MO—/5
St Peters Rehab and Healthcare Center5.4 miSaint Peters, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Lutheran Senior Services at Breeze Park6.6 miSaint Charles, MO★★★★☆3/5
McClay Senior Care7.3 miSaint Peters, MO★★★☆☆3/5
Aspen Point Health and Rehabilitation9.5 miSaint Charles, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5
NHC Healthcare, St Charles10.2 miSaint Charles, MO★★★★☆4/5
Lewis & Clark Gardens11.0 miSaint Charles, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in O Fallon →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265839.