Missouri ›Fenton

Maple Grove Wellness & Rehabilitation

560 Corisande Hill Rd, Fenton, MO 63026 · Jefferson County · 144 certified beds · avg 83 residents/day · certified since Aug 24, 1989

Part of chain: OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT (66 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
1.82
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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 · Jun 26, 2025 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

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: Jun 26, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

All citations in the current public record (53)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Aug 29, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
Aug 29, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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).
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 29, 2025C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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.
Jun 26, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint
Jun 26, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jul 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
May 7, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 7, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
May 7, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
May 7, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
May 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
May 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide at least one adequately sized room for dining and activities, with good lighting, airflow, and furniture.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
May 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 7, 2024C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 2, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (21 → 19).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202290F
2024220F
2025221G ▲

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)

MeasureThis facilityMissouri avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)1.823.663.95bottom 3% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.160.490.69bottom 5% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing1.653.223.50bottom 4% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.150.330.48bottom 12% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)70.756.045.8bottom 14% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)100.047.842.9bottom 2% in Missouri; bottom 1% 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 2.61, RN 0.23, weekend 2.37. 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Blooming Willow Partners LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Brook Partners LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Derhoben TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—05/01/2024
Garetz, DavidIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Knobel Realty TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Linz TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Pas B Sol TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Rembrandt Realty TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Sesame Realty TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—07/01/2024
Wildflower Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%07/01/2024
560 Corisande Hills Road Mo LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Bell, JenniferIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Bell, JenniferIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/22/2024
Brook Partners LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Davidovich, NivIndividualTrustee of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Garetz, DavidIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Garetz, DavidIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/22/2024
Hagins, ElizabethIndividualTrustee of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Kaplan, MordechaiIndividualTrustee of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Knobel Realty TrustOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Delmar Gardens of Meramec Valley0.2 miFenton, MO★★★★★5/5
Fieser Nursing Center1.4 miFenton, MO★★☆☆☆2/5
Friendship Village Sunset Hills3.1 miSaint Louis, MO★★★☆☆3/5
South County Health Care Center3.2 miArnold, MO★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse
Fountain Care at Sunset Hills3.5 miSaint Louis, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5
Delmar Gardens South3.8 miSaint Louis, MO★★★★☆4/5
Big Bend Woods Healthcare Center4.3 miValley Park, MO★☆☆☆☆3/5
Garden View Care Center at Dougherty Ferry4.7 miValley Park, MO★★★★☆5/5
Aberdeen Heights5.3 miKirkwood, MO★★★★★5/5
Grove at Kirkwood, the5.5 miKirkwood, MO★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Woodland Manor Nursing Center5.5 miArnold, MO★★☆☆☆4/5
Bethesda Dilworth6.4 miSaint Louis, MO★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Fenton →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265395.