Sherbrooke Village
4005 Ripa Avenue, Saint Louis, MO 63125 · St. Louis County · 149 certified beds · avg 121 residents/day · certified since Feb 20, 1990 · 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: MGM HEALTHCARE (27 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$38,520
Fines, last 3 years
4.31
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: 2/5
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, repeated · Oct 27, 2022 · F-0880
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.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Dec 2, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 10, 2026 · 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: May 12, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (48)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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). |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 10, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 10, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Apr 10, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Jan 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · from a complaint |
| Sep 9, 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 |
| Aug 20, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have a proper governing body legally responsible for its policies and operations, or that body failed to appoint a properly licensed administrator to manage the facility. · from a complaint |
| Jun 26, 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. |
| Jun 26, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. |
| Jun 26, 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. |
| Jun 26, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 26, 2024 | 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. |
| Jun 26, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 26, 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. |
| Jun 26, 2024 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. |
| Dec 29, 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 31, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint |
| Aug 31, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Aug 31, 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 27, 2022 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not report COVID-19 data to residents and their families as required. Facilities must keep residents and families informed about COVID-19 cases. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| Oct 27, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 27, 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 increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 18).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 15 | 1 | K ▲ |
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 18 | 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)
1 fine totaling $38,520.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2026 | Fine | $38,520 |
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) | 4.31 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 23% in Missouri; top 29% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.29 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 24% in Missouri; bottom 8% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.54 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 32% in Missouri; top 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.14 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 12% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 60.6 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 40% in Missouri; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 76.5 | 47.8 | 42.9 | bottom 12% in Missouri; bottom 7% 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 4.85, RN 0.32, weekend 3.99. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-26 Nationwide Tr | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| 1026 Enterprises II, LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| BCJ Enterprises, LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Bienstock, Faigie | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Bienstock, Judah | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Jeremias, Baruch | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| MM Acquisitions, LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Mo Opco Group, LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Winter, Menachem | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| 10-26 Nationwide Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| 1026 Enterprises II, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| 1026 Jb-Nation LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| BCJ Enterprises, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Bienstock, Faigie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Bienstock, Judah | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Bienstock, Judah | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Culp, Chad | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Culp, Chad | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
| Culp, Chad | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2025 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2024 |
Questions to ask on your visit
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?"
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "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 written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lemay Nursing | 1.6 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bluebird Wellness and Rehabilitation | 1.8 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Nazareth Living Center | 3.3 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mary, Queen and Mother Center | 3.3 mi | Shrewsbury, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St Louis Altenheim | 4.0 mi | Saint Louis, MO | —/5 | ||
| Lansdowne Village | 4.1 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pine Grove Manor | 4.2 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Carrie Elligson Gietner Health Care Center | 4.2 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Magnolia Wellness Center | 4.7 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Lutheran Convalescent Home | 4.9 mi | Webster Groves, MO | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bethesda Dilworth | 4.9 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bethesda Southgate | 5.1 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Saint Louis →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265417.