915 Carl Allen Street, Mount Vernon, MO 65712 (opens Google Maps) · Lawrence County · (417) 466-2183· 90 certified beds · avg 67 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 2003 · 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: ★☆☆☆☆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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Aug 13, 2025 · 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 (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 27, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 F-0609
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
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint F-0755
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0609 |
| Feb 2, 2026 | 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 |
| Dec 12, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Dec 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | 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 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| May 2, 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| May 2, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| May 9, 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 10, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0609 |
| Oct 10, 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0691 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
| Jan 21, 2020 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Jan 21, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| Jan 21, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 21, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Jan 21, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough fresh-air ventilation, whether through windows, mechanical systems, or both. · F-0923 |
| Jan 21, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 21, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 8).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 7 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 12 | 1 | K ▲ |
| 2026 | 2 | 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 $13,762.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2023 | Fine | $13,762 |
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) | 0.47 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.08 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 0.31 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.01 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 93.3 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 1% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 47.8 | 42.9 | — |
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 0.39, RN 0.07, weekend 0.26.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (0.39 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lawrence County Manor. 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 →
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lawrence County Nursing Home District | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/06/1966 |
| Baldwin, Darrel | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2021 |
| Burks, Dylan | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2024 |
| Choate, H | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2014 |
| Eden, David | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2023 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/17/2021 |
| Hilton, Kevin | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2021 |
| Huston, Cessily | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/19/2014 |
| Huston, Cessily | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/19/2014 |
| Lawrence County Nursing Home District | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/06/1966 |
| Midwest Physical Therapy PC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Newby, Russell | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/23/2023 |
| Newby, Russell | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/23/2023 |
| Springer, Max | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/10/2025 |
| Whitesell, Sophie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/23/2023 |
| Williams, Cheryl | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Williams, Cheryl | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Williams, Tina | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2015 |
| Williams, Tina | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2015 |
All 19 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mt Vernon Nursing | 0.4 mi | Mount Vernon, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Ascend at Aurora | 11.5 mi | Aurora, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Ozarks Methodist Manor, the | 12.4 mi | Marionville, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lacoba Homes INC | 14.1 mi | Monett, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Sarcoxie Health Care Center | 16.6 mi | Sarcoxie, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Republic Nursing & Rehab | 19.7 mi | Republic, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265752.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details