Marymount Manor
313 Augustine Rd, Eureka, MO 63025 · St. Louis County · 174 certified beds · avg 76 residents/day · certified since Mar 23, 1979
Part of chain: RILEY SPENCE SENIOR LIVING (5 facilities, chain avg rating 1.6★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
3
Serious findings on record
$132,696
Fines, last 3 years
4.93
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Dec 18, 2023 · 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 (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: Jan 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 18, 2023 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
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: Jan 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 18, 2023 · F-0697 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
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: Jan 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (51)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2025 | D · Potential for 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 |
| Jun 13, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 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. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 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. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Jun 13, 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). |
| Jun 13, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The 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. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The 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. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 25, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 28, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 28, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 18, 2023 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Dec 18, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint |
| Dec 18, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint |
| Dec 18, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 18, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint |
| Sep 19, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 30, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not post the names, addresses, and phone numbers of state agencies and advocacy groups, along with a notice that residents may file complaints with the state survey agency. |
| Sep 30, 2022 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (15 → 15).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 6 | 3 | J ▲ |
| 2024 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 16 | 0 | E |
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 $132,696.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2023 | Fine | $132,696 |
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) | 4.93 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 9% in Missouri; top 14% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.63 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 17% in Missouri; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.55 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 7% in Missouri; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.48 | top 34% in Missouri; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 56.3 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 50% in Missouri; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 47.8 | 42.9 | top 26% in Missouri; top 33% 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 3.69, RN 0.47, weekend 3.41. 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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riley Spence & Associates | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Riley Spence Management Company, LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Riley, Charles | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Spence, Gregory | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Thomas H. Spence Marital Trust I | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Thomas H. Spence Marital Trust II | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Thomas H. Spence Residual Trust | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Herrin, Brittany | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Herrin, Brittany | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Oehler, Brittany | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Oehler, Brittany | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Riley Spence & Associates | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/06/2025 |
| Riley Spence Management Company, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Spence, Gregory | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Spence, Gregory | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Spence, Gregory | Individual | Trustee of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Spence, Gregory | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2025 |
| Thomas H. Spence Marital Trust I | Organization | Trustee of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Thomas H. Spence Marital Trust II | Organization | Trustee of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
| Thomas H. Spence Residual Trust | Organization | Trustee of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2007 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Andrew's at Francis Place | 1.8 mi | Eureka, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Aegis Health and Rehabilitation | 4.2 mi | Wildwood, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Ellisville Rehabilitation and Nursing | 6.0 mi | Ellisville, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Pacific Care Center | 7.3 mi | Pacific, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lutheran Senior Services at Meramec Bluffs | 7.3 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Big Bend Woods Healthcare Center | 8.0 mi | Valley Park, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Manchester Rehab and Healthcare Center | 8.1 mi | Ballwin, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens of Meramec Valley | 8.3 mi | Fenton, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens on the Green | 8.6 mi | Chesterfield, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Maple Grove Wellness & Rehabilitation | 8.6 mi | Fenton, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Garden View Care Center at Dougherty Ferry | 8.9 mi | Valley Park, MO | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Arbor View Nursing and Rehabilitation | 9.6 mi | Cedar Hill, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265140.