Luther Manor Retirement & Nursing Center
3170 Highway 61 North, Hannibal, MO 63401 · Marion County · 64 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since Dec 11, 1997
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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 · Oct 2, 2025 · 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Sep 22, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 23, 2025 · 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Aug 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 23, 2025 · 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Aug 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (28)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 2, 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. |
| Oct 2, 2025 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 2, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. |
| Oct 2, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. |
| Oct 2, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 2, 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. |
| Oct 2, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Oct 2, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. |
| Oct 2, 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). |
| Oct 2, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jul 23, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 16, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint |
| May 23, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| May 23, 2025 | 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 |
| Oct 18, 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. |
| Oct 18, 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. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Feb 7, 2020 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 12).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 2 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 16 | 3 | 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)
1 fine totaling $13,270.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2025 | Fine | $13,270 |
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) | 0.00 | 3.66 | 3.95 | — |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.00 | 0.49 | 0.69 | — |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 0.00 | 3.22 | 3.50 | — |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.00 | 0.33 | 0.48 | — |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 0.0 | 56.0 | 45.8 | — |
| 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 0.00, RN 0.00, weekend 0.00. 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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luther Manor Association | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 06/01/1972 |
| Brooks, Timothy | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/15/2018 |
| Brooks, Timothy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/15/2018 |
| Schachtsiek, Reta | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/02/2021 |
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?"
- "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?"
- "What specific training do your nurse aides complete in dementia care and abuse prevention, and how often is it refreshed?"
- "How do you manage residents' personal funds, and how often do families receive an accounting?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maple Lawn Nursing Home | 1.9 mi | Palmyra, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Beloved Health and Rehabilitation Center | 6.8 mi | Hannibal, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Beth Haven Nursing Home | 7.8 mi | Hannibal, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Sunset Home | 12.8 mi | Quincy, IL | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Good Samaritan Home | 13.0 mi | Quincy, IL | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Monroe City Manor Care Center | 13.3 mi | Monroe City, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Blessing Hospital Snu | 14.1 mi | Quincy, IL | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Quincy Healthcare & Sr Living | 14.7 mi | Quincy, IL | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Westview Nursing Home | 17.3 mi | Center, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265690.