Stonebridge Adams Street

Name: Stonebridge Adams Street
Address: 1024 ADAMS STREET, Jefferson City, MO, 65101, US
Telephone: 5736351320

1024 Adams Street, Jefferson City, MO 65101 · Cole County · 120 certified beds · avg 49 residents/day · certified since Mar 10, 2007 · 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: STONEBRIDGE SENIOR LIVING (12 facilities, chain avg rating 3.3★)

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

$38,656

Fines, last 3 years

3.15

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)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 15, 2024 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Mar 18, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (41)

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
Mar 19, 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. · from a complaint
Mar 19, 2026	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. · from a complaint
Dec 8, 2025	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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. · from a complaint
Dec 8, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint
Aug 22, 2025	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. · from a complaint
Aug 22, 2025	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
Dec 4, 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.
Dec 4, 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.
Dec 4, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Dec 4, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
Dec 4, 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.
Dec 4, 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.
Dec 4, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Dec 4, 2024	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.
Dec 4, 2024	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.
Dec 4, 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.
Dec 4, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	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.
Dec 4, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	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.
Dec 4, 2024	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.
Dec 4, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Oct 17, 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. · from a complaint
Oct 17, 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. · from a complaint
Jul 1, 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. · from a complaint
Feb 15, 2024	▲ G · Actual 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
Nov 17, 2023	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
Nov 17, 2023	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.
Nov 17, 2023	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.
Nov 17, 2023	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.
Nov 17, 2023	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.
Nov 17, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 17, 2023	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
Aug 9, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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
Jun 3, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping.
Jun 3, 2022	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.
Jun 3, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Jun 3, 2022	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.
Jun 3, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jun 3, 2022	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.
Jun 3, 2022	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.
Jun 3, 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.
Jun 3, 2022	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 14).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2022	9	0	F
2023	8	0	F
2024	18	1	G ▲
2025	4	0	F
2026	2	0	D

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 $38,656.

Date	Type	Amount / length
Dec 4, 2024	Fine	$38,656

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)	3.15	3.66	3.95	bottom 29% in Missouri; bottom 19% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.69	0.49	0.69	top 13% in Missouri; top 37% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	2.42	3.22	3.50	bottom 18% in Missouri; bottom 7% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.31	0.33	0.48	top 41% in Missouri; bottom 33% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	72.0	56.0	45.8	bottom 13% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	75.0	47.8	42.9	bottom 15% in Missouri; bottom 9% 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 3.72, RN 0.81, weekend 2.85. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Lierman, Mark	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	11/01/2021
Bridge Rehabilitation INC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2024
Bridge Rehabilitation INC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	04/22/2025
Ciegel, Steven	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/2022
Ciegel, Steven	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/2022
Doerhoff, Eric	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021
Doerhoff, Eric	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021
Eldercare Management Services INC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	08/17/2010
Eldercare Management Services INC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	04/22/2025
Enterprise Bank & Trust	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	05/30/2008
Forvis Mazars LLP	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/25/2016
Knight, Kara	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2018
Knight, Kara	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2018
Lierman Family Co X, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2011
Lierman, Mark	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021
Lierman, Mark	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021
Lierman, Mark	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021
Miller, Beth	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/17/2023
Thayer, Jeanne	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021
Thayer, Jeanne	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2021

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?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
"How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
"How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
"Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
"What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
"What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
"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
Stonebridge Villa Marie	0.8 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★☆☆☆☆	3/5
Capitol River Wellness & Rehabilitation	0.8 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★★☆☆☆	3/5
Heisinger Bluffs Rehab and Healthcare Center	1.4 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★★★★☆	4/5
Heisinger Bluffs Healthcare Western Campus	1.6 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★★★★★	5/5
Jefferson City Manor Care Center	1.8 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★☆☆☆☆	3/5
River City Living Community	3.6 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Stonebridge Oak Tree	3.6 mi	Jefferson City, MO	★★★★☆	4/5
Stonebridge Westphalia	13.0 mi	Westphalia, MO	★★★☆☆	3/5
Riverview Nursing Center	17.9 mi	Mokane, MO	★★★★☆	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Jefferson City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265810.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Stonebridge Adams Street

1024 Adams Street, Jefferson City, MO 65101 · 5736351320

Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 2/5· Fines (3y): $38,656

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Feb 15, 2024 (F-0689, Actual 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.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
☐ "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
☐ "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
☐ "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
☐ "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
☐ "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
☐ "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?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 265810 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)