Oak Park Care Center
6637 Berthold Avenue, Saint Louis, MO 63139 · St. Louis City County · 120 certified beds · avg 82 residents/day · certified since Apr 2, 1990
Part of chain: MGM HEALTHCARE (27 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.22
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
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 · Apr 30, 2024 · F-0693 · triggered by a complaint
The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes.
Why it matters: Unnecessary or poorly managed feeding tubes can cause serious complications like lung infections and take away the ability to eat normally.
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: May 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (38)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 14, 2024 | 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. |
| Aug 14, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Aug 14, 2024 | D · Potential for 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. |
| Aug 14, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 30, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | D · Potential for 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jan 27, 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. |
| Jan 27, 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. |
| Jan 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have firmly secured handrails on both sides of its hallways. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility required residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of moving in, or failed to tell residents which types of care it does not provide. Both practices are against the rules. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2019 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 5).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 17 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 9 | 1 | 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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
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) | 3.22 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 33% in Missouri; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.14 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 4% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.72 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 28% in Missouri; bottom 17% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.15 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 15% in Missouri; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 55.4 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 46% in Missouri; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| 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 3.80, RN 0.16, weekend 3.21. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremias, Baruch | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 05/31/2019 |
| MLS Acquisition LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 7% | 05/31/2019 |
| Bienstock, Judah | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2014 |
| Brooks, Danielle | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/19/2021 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
- "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?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "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?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delhaven Manor | 1.9 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Monarch Springs Wellness & Rehabilitation | 2.1 mi | University City, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bernard Care Center | 2.6 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lutheran Convalescent Home | 2.7 mi | Webster Groves, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Barnes-Jewish Extended Care | 2.7 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| U-City Forest Manor | 3.1 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lansdowne Village | 3.3 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pine Grove Manor | 3.4 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Beauvais Rehab and Healthcare Center | 3.5 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Life Care Center of St Louis | 3.5 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Saint Louis →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265427.