Lemay Nursing
9353 South Broadway, Saint Louis, MO 63125 · St. Louis County · 60 certified beds · avg 44 residents/day · certified since Jan 14, 2004
Part of chain: COMMUNITY CARE CENTERS (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
2.93
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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 · May 1, 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: May 21, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (37)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. |
| May 15, 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. |
| May 15, 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. |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| May 15, 2025 | 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. |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. |
| May 15, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. |
| Jan 8, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jun 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| May 1, 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 |
| May 1, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. · from a complaint |
| Mar 8, 2024 | D · Potential for 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 |
| Dec 13, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. |
| Dec 13, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Dec 13, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Dec 13, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. |
| Dec 13, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | 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 24, 2021 | 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 24, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Sep 24, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 15).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 4 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 16 | 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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
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) | 2.93 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 21% in Missouri; bottom 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.24 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 15% in Missouri; bottom 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.84 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 35% in Missouri; bottom 23% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.20 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 29% in Missouri; bottom 12% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 36.8 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 8% in Missouri; top 28% 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 2.86, RN 0.23, weekend 2.77. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country Life Acres GMW GST Non-Exempt Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Weiner, Craig | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 06/01/2024 |
| Weiner, Gina | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 06/01/2024 |
| Country Life Acres GMW GST Non-Exempt Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Country Life Acres GMW GST Non-Exempt Trust | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| First Mid Bank & Trust Na | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| First Mid Bank & Trust Na | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Gao, Shawn | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| GC Asset Holding LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| GC Asset Management LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| GC Asset Management LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| GC of Lemay LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| GC of Lemay LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Gibbs, Kay | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Moughal, Catherine | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Moughal, Catherine | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Weiner, Craig | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
| Weiner, Gina | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2024 |
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?"
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "What happens if a resident is hungry between meals or misses a mealtime — what food options are available?"
- "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?"
- "Who oversees antibiotic use here, and how do you decide when an antibiotic is really needed?"
- "Who is your infection preventionist, and what training do they have?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sherbrooke Village | 1.6 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St Louis Altenheim | 2.8 mi | Saint Louis, MO | —/5 | ||
| Carrie Elligson Gietner Health Care Center | 3.0 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Bluebird Wellness and Rehabilitation | 3.3 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lansdowne Village | 3.7 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pine Grove Manor | 3.7 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Magnolia Wellness Center | 3.8 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Nazareth Living Center | 4.0 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mary, Queen and Mother Center | 4.2 mi | Shrewsbury, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Bethesda Southgate | 5.3 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Beauvais Rehab and Healthcare Center | 5.4 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Lutheran Convalescent Home | 5.6 mi | Webster Groves, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Saint Louis →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265775.