How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Brookhaven Nursing & Rehab
3405 West Mt Vernon, Springfield, MO 65802 (opens Google Maps) · Greene County · (417) 874-9600· 90 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since Apr 21, 2010 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: JAMES & JUDY LINCOLN (56 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 13, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.76
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 37 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint F-0684
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint F-0550
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint F-0658
View all 37 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0812 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0880 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · F-0678 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0759 |
| Dec 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Oct 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0600 |
| Oct 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Oct 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0812 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0582 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0623 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0880 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0700 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough fresh-air ventilation, whether through windows, mechanical systems, or both. · F-0923 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0759 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | 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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMissouri averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.76
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.46
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.06
Missouri average: 3.22
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Missouri avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.76 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 13% in Missouri; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 43% in Missouri; bottom 31% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.06 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 16% in Missouri; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 35% in Missouri; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 62.5 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 34% in Missouri; bottom 13% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 47.8 | 42.9 | — |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 3.73, RN 0.36, weekend 3.19.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.73 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Brookhaven Nursing & Rehab. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lincoln, James | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 12/01/2014 |
| Lincoln, Judy | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 12/01/2014 |
| Knapp, Adam | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/25/2022 |
| LTC Management Services LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2014 |
All 4 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain James & Judy Lincoln — 56 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- California Care Center — California, MO · overall 5/5
- Camdenton Windsor Estates — Camdenton, MO · overall 1/5
- Carroll House — Carrollton, MO · overall 2/5abuse
- Claru Deville Nursing Center — Fredericktown, MO · overall 3/5
- Clearview Nursing Center — Sikeston, MO · overall 4/5
- Country Meadows — Park Hills, MO · overall 5/5
- Crestview Home — Bethany, MO · overall 1/5
- Crowley Ridge Care Center — Dexter, MO · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 55 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "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?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 63% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 24 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wilson's Creek Nursing & Rehab | 0.1 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Springfield Skilled Care Center | 1.0 mi | Springfield, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Manor at Elfindale, the | 2.3 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Magnolia Square Nursing and Rehab | 3.3 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Springfield Rehabilitation & Health Care Center | 3.5 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Maples Health and Rehabilitation, the | 3.8 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Maranatha Village, INC | 4.5 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Springfield Villa | 4.9 mi | Springfield, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Birch Pointe Health and Rehabilitation | 5.1 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Neighborhoods at Quail Creek, the | 5.1 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Spring Valley Health & Rehabilitation Center | 5.1 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Cox Medical Centers Meyer Orthopedic and Surgical | 5.3 mi | Springfield, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Greene, MO — 21 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Glendale Gardens Nursing & Rehab — Springfield, MO · overall 3/5
- James River Nursing and Rehabilitation — Springfield, MO · overall 3/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265835.