Golden Age Nursing Home
12498 SE Highway 116, Braymer, MO 64624 · Caldwell County · 83 certified beds · avg 36 residents/day · certified since May 23, 2001
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5
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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 3, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Oct 13, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (23)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). |
| Sep 4, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint |
| Sep 3, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility hired someone with an official finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft against them. Facilities are not allowed to employ people with such findings. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Sep 3, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 3, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jan 12, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jan 12, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping. |
| Jan 12, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Jan 12, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 12, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (14 → 4).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 14 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 4 | 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)
0 fines totaling $0, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2024 | Payment Denial | 15 days from Oct 10, 2024 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Missouri avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.11 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 8% in Missouri; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.74 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 10% in Missouri; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.24 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 13% in Missouri; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.36 | 0.33 | 0.48 | top 27% in Missouri; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 55.6 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 47% in Missouri; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 47.8 | 42.9 | — |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.42, RN 0.49, weekend 2.83. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bills, Tom | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Clevenger, Gerald | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Golden Age Nursing Home District | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/1969 |
| Golden Age Nursing Home District | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/1969 |
| Hayes, Kesley | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Hayes, Kesley | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Hudson, Laurie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Hudson, Laurie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Kelly, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Kincaid, Karla | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Murdock, Tammy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/20/2004 |
| Murdock, Tammy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/20/2004 |
| Neely, James | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Neely, James | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2008 |
| Pollard, Marjorie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Stone, Joyce | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "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?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "How do you decide you have enough staff and resources for your resident population, including nights and weekends?"
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hill Crest Manor | 14.5 mi | Hamilton, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 1 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265718.