Missouri ›Salem

Seville Care Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

35625 Highway 72, Salem, MO 65560 (opens Google Maps) · Dent County · (573) 729-6142· 90 certified beds · avg 45 residents/day · certified since Jan 4, 1993 · 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 →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

What the abuse flag means →

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 16, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
—
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.

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 38 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 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 F-0880

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint F-0627

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint F-0602

View all 38 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
Mar 30, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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 · F-0880
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Nov 18, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Jan 16, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 16, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 16, 2025E · 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0686
Jan 16, 2025C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials. · F-0680
Jan 16, 2025B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Dec 4, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657
May 9, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Dec 12, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
Nov 16, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
Nov 16, 2023F · 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
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561
Nov 16, 2023E · 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
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Nov 16, 2023D · 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
Nov 16, 2023D · 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
Sep 16, 2022F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Sep 16, 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
Sep 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0569
Sep 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping. · F-0570
Sep 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0881
Sep 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 16, 2022D · 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
Sep 16, 2022C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0575
Sep 16, 2022C · 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
Sep 16, 2022C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 6).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022140F
2023110F
202420D
202590E
202620F

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: Not reported
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: Not reported
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: Not reported
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)—3.663.95—
Registered Nurse hours—0.490.69—
Weekend total nurse staffing—3.223.50—
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)—0.330.48—
Total nursing staff turnover (%)59.356.045.8bottom 43% in Missouri; bottom 17% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.047.842.9top 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 —, RN —, weekend —.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (— 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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Seville Care Center. 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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Krisley Properties LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—02/01/2023
MJZ Investment LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—02/01/2023
North Star Equity Group LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—02/01/2023
Redbud Investment Group LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—02/01/2023
Silver Maple Properties LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—02/01/2023
Williza PropertiesOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—02/01/2023
Bigham, BrookeIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Bigham, BrookeIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Light, LindseyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2024
North Star Equity Group LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023

All 10 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

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.

  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
  • "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 59% 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)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Salem Memorial District Hospital0.0 miSalem, MO★★★☆☆4/5
Salem Care Center1.8 miSalem, MO★★☆☆☆3/5
Hickory Manor19.7 miLicking, MO★★☆☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Salem →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265521.

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