Aspire Senior Living Advance

Name: Aspire Senior Living Advance
Address: 315 SOUTH TILLEY STREET, Advance, MO, 63730, US
Telephone: 5737223440

315 South Tilley Street, Advance, MO 63730 · Stoddard County · 55 certified beds · avg 31 residents/day · certified since Nov 1, 1993

Part of chain: ASPIRE SENIOR LIVING (16 facilities, chain avg rating 1.9★)

4/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.09

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (32)

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

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Nov 22, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Nov 22, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not post the names, addresses, and phone numbers of state agencies and advocacy groups, along with a notice that residents may file complaints with the state survey agency.
Nov 22, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Aug 18, 2023	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
Aug 18, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not honor residents' right to manage their own money and financial affairs.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Aug 18, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Aug 18, 2023	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 6).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2023	15	F
2024	11	D
2026	6	D

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)

Measure	This facility	Missouri avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.09	3.66	3.95	bottom 26% in Missouri; bottom 17% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.62	0.49	0.69	top 20% in Missouri; top 45% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	2.52	3.22	3.50	bottom 20% in Missouri; bottom 10% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.61	0.33	0.48	top 5% in Missouri; top 22% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	51.6	56.0	45.8	top 37% in Missouri; bottom 33% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	0.0	47.8	42.9	—

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 3.37, RN 0.68, weekend 2.74. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Calvert, Gregg	Individual	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	12%	06/01/2021
Harris, Jerry	Individual	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	10%	06/01/2021
Steele, Sheri	Individual	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	8%	06/01/2021
Calvert, Gregg	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2021
Calvert, Gregg	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2021
Harris, Jerry	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2021
Harris, Jerry	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2021

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
"Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
"What specific dementia training do your staff receive, and how do you handle difficult moments without medication?"
"Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
"If my family member goes to the hospital, how long will you hold their bed, and will we get that in writing?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection
Chaffee Nursing Center	15.0 mi	Chaffee, MO	★★★★★	5/5
Prairie View Skilled Nursing	15.1 mi	Bloomfield, MO	★★☆☆☆	4/5
Puxico Nursing and Rehabilitation Center	16.6 mi	Puxico, MO	★★★★☆	4/5
Stonebridge Marble Hill	18.0 mi	Marble Hill, MO	★★★★☆	4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Advance →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265550.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Aspire Senior Living Advance

315 South Tilley Street, Advance, MO 63730 · 5737223440

Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
☐ "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
☐ "What specific dementia training do your staff receive, and how do you handle difficult moments without medication?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
☐ "If my family member goes to the hospital, how long will you hold their bed, and will we get that in writing?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 265550 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)