Missouri ›Saint Louis

Estates of Spanish Lake, the

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

610 Prigge Road, Saint Louis, MO 63138 (opens Google Maps) · St. Louis County · (314) 741-9393· 150 certified beds · avg 140 residents/day · certified since Mar 19, 2004 · 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 →

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 25, 2025
3
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 25, 2024
$57,868
Fines, last 3 years
1.86
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jan 25, 2024 · 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Mar 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Aug 24, 2023 · F-0584 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.

Why it matters: An unsafe or unclean environment affects residents' health, comfort, and dignity every single day.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 21, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 25, 2024 · 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: Mar 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 66 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. F-0727

  3. 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

View all 66 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jul 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Apr 25, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 25, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have enough staff with the right skills to meet the mental and behavioral health needs of its residents, such as those living with dementia or depression. · from a complaint · F-0741
Apr 25, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · F-0745
Apr 25, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Oct 10, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 17, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919
Sep 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · from a complaint · F-0691
Jan 25, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Jan 25, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 25, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0575
Jan 25, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Jan 25, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to manage their own money and financial affairs. · F-0567
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). · F-0742
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0637
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0756
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847
Oct 17, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 17, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 17, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Aug 24, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 24, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping. · F-0570
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 8, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0909
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 8, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 8, 2021C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (22 → 14).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 27
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2025
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2021180E
202361K ▲
2024272J ▲
2025150F

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

2 fines totaling $57,868, plus 2 Medicare payment denial periods.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jan 25, 2024Fine$32,771
Jan 25, 2024Payment Denial9 days from Feb 28, 2024
Aug 24, 2023Fine$25,097
Aug 24, 2023Payment Denial40 days from Sep 29, 2023

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMissouri averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 1.86
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.04
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 1.62
Missouri average: 3.22
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMissouri avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)1.863.663.95bottom 4% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.040.490.69bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing1.623.223.50bottom 4% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.000.330.48bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)68.856.045.8bottom 18% in Missouri; bottom 7% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)—47.842.9—

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 2.30, RN 0.05, weekend 2.00.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.30 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Estates of Spanish Lake, the. 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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Rosenberg, ZevIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest60%09/10/2014
Spector, TuviyahIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE09/10/2014
Gao, ShawnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2019
Gao, ShawnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2019
Hawkins, KatrinaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/04/2025
Hawkins, KatrinaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/04/2025
Medallion Healthcare Systems LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/10/2014
Rosenberg, ZevIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/10/2014
Rosenberg, ZevIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/10/2014
Spector, TuviyahIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/10/2014
Spector, TuviyahIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/10/2014

All 11 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
  • "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?"
  • "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
  • "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
  • "What training does your staff have in dementia and behavioral health, and how many residents with these needs do you serve?"
  • "Who provides social services here, and how would they support my family member's emotional and social needs?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Missouri midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 69% 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 82 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Hidden Lake Health Care Center2.4 miSaint Louis, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5
Christian Extended Care & Rehabilitation3.5 miSaint Louis, MO★★★★★5/5
Atrium Place Health and Rehabilitation3.8 miSaint Louis, MO★☆☆☆☆2/5
Stonebridge Florissant4.1 miFlorissant, MO★★☆☆☆3/5
Evercare of Granite City4.3 miGranite City, IL★★★☆☆4/5
Estates of St Louis, LLC, the4.6 miSaint Louis, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5
Crestwood Health Care Center4.7 miFlorissant, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Delmar Gardens North5.2 miBlack Jack, MO★★☆☆☆3/5
Hillside Health Care Center5.2 miSaint Louis, MO—/5abuseSFF
Lakeview Post Acute5.3 miFlorissant, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5
Pillars of North County Health & Rehab Center, the5.5 miFlorissant, MO★★☆☆☆2/5
Evercare at Stearns5.5 miGranite City, IL★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse

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.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Saint Louis →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265776.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details