15197 Clayton Road, Chesterfield, MO 63017 (opens Google Maps) · St. Louis County · (636) 394-7515· 120 certified beds · avg 83 residents/day · certified since Feb 22, 1982 · 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★)
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 4, 2024 · F-0684
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 11, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 11, 2023 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 10, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 30 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0686
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 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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Jul 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0625 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 4, 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 |
| Oct 4, 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Oct 11, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 11, 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 |
| Oct 11, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · from a complaint · F-0699 |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568 |
| Apr 5, 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 |
| Apr 5, 2023 | 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. · F-0561 |
| Apr 5, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Apr 5, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| Apr 5, 2023 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0577 |
| Jun 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 25, 2019 | 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 25, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| Jun 25, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Jun 25, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 11).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 9 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 3 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $46,589, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2024 | Fine | $46,589 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | Payment Denial | 8 days from Nov 12, 2024 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.37 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 21% in Missouri; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.34 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 36% in Missouri; bottom 14% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.17 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 14% in Missouri; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.17 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 20% in Missouri; bottom 8% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 57.7 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 46% in Missouri; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 70.0 | 47.8 | 42.9 | bottom 19% in Missouri; bottom 12% 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 4.38, RN 0.34, weekend 4.19.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.38 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Delmar Gardens on the Green. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
| Church, Vicky | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2005 |
| Delmar Gardens Management Services INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2005 |
| Grossberg, Gabe | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/07/2003 |
| Marx, Kenneth | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2022 |
| Marx, Kenneth | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/11/2019 |
| Oppenheimer, Howard | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/07/2003 |
All 15 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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.
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.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manchester Rehab and Healthcare Center | 2.1 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Garden View Care Center of Chesterfield | 2.6 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Lutheran Senior Services at Meramec Bluffs | 2.8 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Athene Nursing and Rehabilitation | 2.9 mi | Town and Country, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Ellisville Rehabilitation and Nursing | 2.9 mi | Ellisville, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Mason Pointe Care Center | 2.9 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens West | 2.9 mi | Town and Country, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens of Chesterfield | 3.0 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Friendship Village Chesterfield | 3.8 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Brooking Park | 3.8 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Westchester House, the | 4.0 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Aegis Health and Rehabilitation | 4.4 mi | Wildwood, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
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 265156.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details