How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Riverview at the Park Care and Rehabilitation Cent
1100 Progress Parkway, Sainte Genevieve, MO 63670 (opens Google Maps) · Ste. Genevieve County · (573) 883-3454· 120 certified beds · avg 99 residents/day · certified since Nov 26, 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: SHAFIQ MALIK (9 facilities, chain avg rating 3.5★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Sep 12, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
2.88
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★★★5/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 F-0684
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). F-0628
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
View all 22 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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0684 |
| Sep 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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). · F-0628 |
| Sep 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Sep 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0607 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0623 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0625 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0728 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0880 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0700 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0582 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0645 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0656 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0695 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Jul 27, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 4 | 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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMissouri averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 2.88
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.25
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.38
Missouri average: 3.22
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Missouri avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 2.88 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 19% in Missouri; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.25 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 17% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.38 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 17% in Missouri; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.21 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 33% in Missouri; bottom 14% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 56.0 | 56.0 | 45.8 | top 49% in Missouri; bottom 23% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 47.8 | 42.9 | top 46% in Missouri; bottom 39% 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 3.03, RN 0.26, weekend 2.51.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.03 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: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Riverview at the Park Care and Rehabilitation Cent. 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 - Individual
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Malik, Ali | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 49% | 07/24/2009 |
| Callahan, Katherine | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/29/2021 |
| Callahan, Katherine | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/10/2025 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/10/2020 |
| Klein, Mary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2024 |
| Leung, Erika | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Leung, Erika | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/10/2025 |
| Malik, Ali | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/30/2009 |
| Malik, Ali | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/24/2009 |
| Malik, Shafiq | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/24/2009 |
| Malik, Shafiq | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/24/2009 |
| Malik, Shafiq | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/24/2009 |
All 12 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Shafiq Malik — 9 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.
- St Joe Manor — Bonne Terre, MO · overall 1/5
- St Louis Altenheim — Saint Louis, MO · overall —/5
- Beautiful Savior Home — Belton, MO · overall 3/5
- Community Manor — Farmington, MO · overall 3/5
- Crystal Oaks — Festus, MO · overall 4/5
- Fountainbleau Lodge — Cape Girardeau, MO · overall 5/5
- Fountainbleau Nursing Center — Festus, MO · overall 4/5
- Lutheran Nursing Home — Concordia, MO · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
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?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "How is pest control handled here, and when was the last treatment or inspection?"
- "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?"
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 56% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Genevieve Nursing | 1.8 mi | Sainte Genevieve, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Three Springs Sr Living & Rhab | 13.8 mi | Chester, IL | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Independence Care Center of Perry County | 18.3 mi | Perryville, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Estates of Perryville, LLC, the | 19.0 mi | Perryville, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265743.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).