Loch Haven
701 Sunset Hills Dr, Macon, MO 63552 · Macon County · 100 certified beds · avg 72 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1983
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 12, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
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): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Apr 1, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 7, 2025 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
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: Apr 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (32)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 11, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Aug 11, 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. |
| Aug 11, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. |
| Aug 11, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Aug 11, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | 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). |
| Mar 7, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Mar 12, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | 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 |
| Nov 2, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Nov 2, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Nov 2, 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. |
| Nov 2, 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. |
| Nov 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Nov 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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 16, 2020 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 16).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 7 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 1 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2025 | 18 | 1 | G ▲ |
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)
2 fines totaling $77,841.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2025 | Fine | $69,820 |
| Mar 12, 2024 | Fine | $8,021 |
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) | 4.20 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 26% in Missouri; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 42% in Missouri; bottom 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.76 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 25% in Missouri; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 36% in Missouri; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 29.8 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 3% in Missouri; top 14% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 16.7 | 47.8 | 42.9 | top 8% in Missouri; top 9% in the U.S. |
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 3.57, RN 0.39, weekend 3.20. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freeman, Byron | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/19/2012 |
| Freeman, Byron | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2011 |
| Hinshaw, Kelsey | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2012 |
| Hinshaw, Kelsey | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2012 |
Questions to ask on your visit
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?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What specific dementia training do your staff receive, and how do you handle difficult moments without medication?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
- "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macon Health Care Center | 2.3 mi | Macon, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Clarence Care Center | 12.6 mi | Clarence, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| La Plata Nursing Home | 19.4 mi | La Plata, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265200.