How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Delmar Gardens of Meramec Valley
#1 Arbor Terrace, Fenton, MO 63026 (opens Google Maps) · St. Louis County · (636) 343-0016· 190 certified beds · avg 169 residents/day · certified since Jan 22, 2001 · 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: DELMAR GARDENS (12 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 5, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.57
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: ★★★★★5/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint F-0561
View all 22 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 5, 2025 | 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 5, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint · F-0561 |
| Mar 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607 |
| Mar 26, 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 |
| Mar 26, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 26, 2024 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0656 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | 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. · F-0580 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0605 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0865 |
| Mar 1, 2022 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time. · F-0888 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 2).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | E |
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: 3.57
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.37
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.20
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) | 3.57 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 49% in Missouri; bottom 40% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.37 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 41% in Missouri; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.20 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 47% in Missouri; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 36% in Missouri; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.8 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 28% in Missouri; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 38.1 | 47.8 | 42.9 | top 36% in Missouri; top 44% in the U.S. |
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 3.36, RN 0.35, weekend 3.02.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.36 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Delmar Gardens of Meramec Valley. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delmar Gardens Enterprises INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 03/07/2003 |
| Gabe Grossberg and George Grossberg, Trustees of the Henry and Barbara | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 8% | 03/07/2003 |
| George Grossberg and Gabe Grossberg, Trustees of the Henry and Barbara | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 8% | 03/07/2003 |
| Goldberg-Nom LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 25% | 03/07/2003 |
| Grossberg, Gabe | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 16% | 03/07/2003 |
| Grossberg, George | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 11% | 03/07/2003 |
| Non-Gst Family Trust Est U/W of Israel Goldberg Fbo Janice Bitanski | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 6% | 04/10/2013 |
| Non-Gst Family Trust Established U/W of Israel Goldberg Fbo Harry Zvi | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 6% | 04/10/2013 |
| Non-Gstfamily Trust Est U/W Israel Goldberg Fbo Diane Fredman | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 6% | 04/10/2013 |
| Delmar Gardens Management Services INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2005 |
| Gray, Tracie | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2021 |
| Grossberg, Gabe | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/07/2003 |
| Marx, Kenneth | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/11/2019 |
| Oppenheimer, Howard | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/07/2003 |
All 14 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 Delmar Gardens — 12 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.
- Delmar Gardens of O'Fallon — O Fallon, MO · overall 3/5
- Delmar Gardens on the Green — Chesterfield, MO · overall 2/5
- Delmar Gardens South — Saint Louis, MO · overall 4/5
- Delmar Gardens West — Town and Country, MO · overall 2/5
- St. Joseph Villa Nursing Center — Omaha, NE · overall 1/5
- Delmar Gardens of Gwinnett — Lawrenceville, GA · overall 2/5
- Delmar Gardens of Smyrna — Smyrna, GA · overall 3/5
- Delmar Gardens of Lenexa — Lenexa, KS · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 11 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.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
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 48% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 14 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 81 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maple Grove Wellness & Rehabilitation | 0.2 mi | Fenton, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Fieser Nursing Center | 1.6 mi | Fenton, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| South County Health Care Center | 3.2 mi | Arnold, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Friendship Village Sunset Hills | 3.4 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fountain Care at Sunset Hills | 3.8 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens South | 4.0 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Big Bend Woods Healthcare Center | 4.3 mi | Valley Park, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Garden View Care Center at Dougherty Ferry | 4.7 mi | Valley Park, MO | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Aberdeen Heights | 5.4 mi | Kirkwood, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Woodland Manor Nursing Center | 5.6 mi | Arnold, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Grove at Kirkwood, the | 5.6 mi | Kirkwood, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Lutheran Senior Services at Meramec Bluffs | 6.4 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in St. Louis, MO — 69 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Delmar Gardens on the Green — Chesterfield, MO · overall 2/5
- Delmar Gardens West — Town and Country, MO · overall 2/5
- Ellisville Rehabilitation and Nursing — Ellisville, MO · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Estates of Spanish Lake, the — Saint Louis, MO · overall 1/5
- Estates of St Louis, LLC, the — Saint Louis, MO · overall 1/5
- Florissant Valley Health & Rehabilitation Center — Florissant, MO · overall 1/5
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 265711.