How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
SSM Health Depaul Hospital - Anna House
12284 Depaul Drive, Bridgeton, MO 63044 (opens Google Maps) · St. Louis County · (314) 209-8814· 105 certified beds · avg 88 residents/day · certified since Sep 11, 2012 · 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: SSM HEALTH (2 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Sep 26, 2024
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Oct 17, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.49
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 17, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 17, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 12, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 F-0689
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. F-0812
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
View all 29 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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 · F-0689 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0812 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0759 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0554 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0677 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0690 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0919 |
| Sep 26, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0732 |
| Apr 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0686 |
| Apr 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| May 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| May 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0732 |
| May 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0812 |
| May 12, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 12, 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 |
| May 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| May 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0690 |
| May 12, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0759 |
| Nov 13, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 13, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0610 |
| Nov 13, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Nov 13, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Nov 13, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · F-0576 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 13).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 1 | 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)
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: 5.49
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.63
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.98
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) | 5.49 | 3.66 | 3.95 | top 5% in Missouri; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.63 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 19% in Missouri; top 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.98 | 3.22 | 3.50 | top 4% in Missouri; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.48 | top 35% in Missouri; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 56.0 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 47.8 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.62, RN 0.53, weekend 4.19.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.62 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for SSM Health Depaul Hospital - Anna House. 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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SSM Health Care Corporation | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2015 |
| SSM Health Care St Louis | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2015 |
| St Louis University | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2015 |
| Buller, Timothy | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2015 |
| Buller, Timothy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2015 |
| Cerny, Jan | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2021 |
| Fotheringham, Jeremy | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2021 |
| Kaiser, Laura | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2017 |
| Lamm, Eileen | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/23/2020 |
| Long, Douglas | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2019 |
| Smith, Kevin | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2023 |
| St. Andrew's Management Services | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2012 |
| The Sarah Community | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2012 |
| Voyles, Tracy | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/02/2016 |
All 14 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 SSM Health — 2 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 Francis Home — Fond Du Lac, WI · overall 3/5
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.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
- "If my family member's health suddenly changes, how quickly do you reassess them and update their care?"
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?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 14 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 101 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avenir at Mark Twain | 0.4 mi | Bridgeton, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Parkwood Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 0.9 mi | Maryland Heights, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Bridgeton | 1.2 mi | Bridgeton, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stonebridge Maryland Heights | 1.5 mi | Maryland Heights, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| NHC Healthcare, Maryland Heights | 1.9 mi | Maryland Heights, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| River Crossing Rehab and Healthcare Center | 2.4 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bentleys Extended Care | 3.5 mi | Overland, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Laurel Meadows Wellness & Rehabilitation | 3.9 mi | Saint Charles, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lewis & Clark Gardens | 4.1 mi | Saint Charles, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Windsor Estates of St Charles | 4.5 mi | Saint Charles, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| NHC Healthcare, St Charles | 5.0 mi | Saint Charles, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| St Johns Place | 5.1 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in St. Louis, MO — 69 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- St Andrew's at Francis Place — Eureka, MO · overall 2/5
- St Sophia Health & Rehabilitation Center — Florissant, MO · overall 1/5
- Stonebridge Florissant — Florissant, MO · overall 2/5
- Surrey Place St Lukes Hospital Skilled Nursing — Chesterfield, MO · overall 4/5
- U-City Forest Manor — Saint Louis, MO · overall 1/5
- Westchester House, the — Chesterfield, MO · overall 2/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265842.