Missouri ›Macon

Loch Haven

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

701 Sunset Hills Dr, Macon, MO 63552 (opens Google Maps) · Macon County · (660) 385-3113· 100 certified beds · avg 72 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1983 · 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 →

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 11, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 7, 2025
$77,841
Fines, last 3 years
4.20
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · 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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 1, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    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 F-0744

  2. 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

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    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

View all 32 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0744
Aug 11, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0561
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0640
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0657
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0727
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0809
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0887
Aug 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Aug 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0881
Aug 11, 2025C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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). · F-0628
Mar 7, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 12, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Nov 2, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Nov 2, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0638
Nov 2, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0759
Nov 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0554
Nov 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0756
Nov 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 16, 2020F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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 16, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Jan 16, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Jan 16, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 16, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0761
Jan 16, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 16, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0677

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 16).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202070F
202360F
202411J ▲
2025181G ▲

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

2 fines totaling $77,841.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 7, 2025Fine$69,820
Mar 12, 2024Fine$8,021

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMissouri averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.20
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.46
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.76
Missouri average: 3.22
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMissouri avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.203.663.95top 26% in Missouri; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.460.490.69top 42% in Missouri; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.763.223.50top 25% in Missouri; top 31% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.220.330.48bottom 36% in Missouri; bottom 16% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)29.856.045.8top 3% in Missouri; top 14% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)16.747.842.9top 8% in Missouri; top 9% 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 3.57, RN 0.39, weekend 3.20.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.57 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

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: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Loch Haven. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

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.

Before you compare prices

  • Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
  • Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
  • Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Freeman, ByronIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE11/19/2012
Freeman, ByronIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2011
Hinshaw, KelseyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2012
Hinshaw, KelseyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2012

All 4 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 30% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Macon Health Care Center2.3 miMacon, MO★★★★★4/5
Clarence Care Center12.6 miClarence, MO★★★☆☆3/5
La Plata Nursing Home19.4 miLa Plata, MO★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Macon →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265200.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details