Pleasant View Nursing Home
470 Rainbow Drive,, Rock Port, MO 64482 · Atchison County · 60 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since Dec 1, 2002 · 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: BLUE SKY BASIN, LLC (5 facilities, chain avg rating 1.4★)
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.
All citations in the current public record (24)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 22, 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. |
| May 22, 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Apr 10, 2024 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2023 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. |
| Feb 8, 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. |
| Feb 8, 2023 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2023 | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 3).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 16 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 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)
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) | 2.86 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 19% in Missouri; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.24 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 16% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.53 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 21% in Missouri; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.07 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 2% in Missouri; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 45.0 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 23% in Missouri; bottom 50% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 60.0 | 47.8 | 42.9 | bottom 33% in Missouri; bottom 22% 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 2.40, RN 0.20, weekend 2.13. 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: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gateway Mo2 LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 12/01/2022 |
| Sloans Lake Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 63% | 12/01/2022 |
| Berger, Eliot | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Perlow, Bernard | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Twyman, Megan | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
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 record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
- "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good Samaritan Society - Auburn | 17.8 mi | Auburn, NE | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 1 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265744.