Missouri ›Fenton

Maple Grove Wellness & Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

560 Corisande Hill Rd, Fenton, MO 63026 (opens Google Maps) · Jefferson County · (636) 343-2282· 144 certified beds · avg 83 residents/day · certified since Aug 24, 1989 · 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 →

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

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 29, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 26, 2025
$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)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Jun 26, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 53 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The 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. F-0865

  2. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. F-0867

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

    The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. F-0584

View all 53 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 29, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0865
Aug 29, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
Aug 29, 2025E · 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
Aug 29, 2025E · 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
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0868
Aug 29, 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 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0605
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0655
Aug 29, 2025D · 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
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0691
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Aug 29, 2025D · 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
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0909
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 29, 2025C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0577
Jun 26, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0760
Jun 26, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 19, 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. · from a complaint · F-0881
Jul 24, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
May 7, 2024F · 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
May 7, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0865
May 7, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
May 7, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0868
May 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0623
May 7, 2024E · 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
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0577
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0578
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0625
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0637
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
May 7, 2024D · 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
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide at least one adequately sized room for dining and activities, with good lighting, airflow, and furniture. · F-0920
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
May 7, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 7, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0732
Dec 2, 2022F · 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
Dec 2, 2022E · 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
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0585
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0656
Dec 2, 2022D · 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
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0688
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883

Inspection trend by year

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

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 22
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 22
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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: 1.82
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.16
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 1.65
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)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 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 2.61, RN 0.23, weekend 2.37.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.61 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.

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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Maple Grove Wellness & Rehabilitation. 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 →

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

Showing 20 of 30 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 10 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Opco Skilled Management — 66 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 65 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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 systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "How does your quality improvement program work, and can you share a recent example of a problem you found and fixed?"
  • "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
  • "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
  • "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
  • "How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Missouri midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 71% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 30 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 81 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 →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Jefferson, MO — 11 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Fenton →

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

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

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