How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
1025 Chesterfield Pointe Parkway, Chesterfield, MO 63017 (opens Google Maps) · St. Louis County · (636) 537-3333· 52 certified beds · avg 46 residents/day · certified since Oct 4, 1995 · 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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 21 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 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. · from a complaint F-0677
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
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 13, 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 |
| Jun 16, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jun 16, 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 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility required residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of moving in, or failed to tell residents which types of care it does not provide. Both practices are against the rules. · F-0620 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 9, 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. · F-0550 |
| Jan 9, 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 |
| Jan 9, 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. · F-0755 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| Oct 13, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 24, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 7).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
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) | 5.98 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 2% in Missouri; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.63 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 18% in Missouri; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.51 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 2% in Missouri; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.48 | top 33% in Missouri; bottom 39% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 61.6 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 37% in Missouri; bottom 14% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 40.0 | 47.8 | 42.9 | top 37% in Missouri; top 46% 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 5.39, RN 0.57, weekend 4.96.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.39 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Garden View Care Center of Chesterfield. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Larus Corporation | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/01/2000 |
| Winter, Richard | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 01/01/1997 |
| Luaders, Jodi | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Weier, George | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1997 |
| Weier, George | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1997 |
| Winter, Richard | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1997 |
| Winter, Richard | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1997 |
All 7 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delmar Gardens of Chesterfield | 0.8 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mason Pointe Care Center | 1.0 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens West | 1.0 mi | Town and Country, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Friendship Village Chesterfield | 1.1 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Westchester House, the | 1.4 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Brooking Park | 2.0 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Surrey Place St Lukes Hospital Skilled Nursing | 2.0 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Athene Nursing and Rehabilitation | 2.4 mi | Town and Country, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Delmar Gardens on the Green | 2.6 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Manchester Rehab and Healthcare Center | 4.0 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Creve Coeur Manor | 4.7 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lutheran Senior Services at Meramec Bluffs | 5.0 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
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 265627.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details