1550 Villas Drive, De Soto, MO 63020 (opens Google Maps) · Jefferson County · (636) 586-6559· 56 certified beds · avg 51 residents/day · certified since Oct 20, 2003 · 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★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 24, 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 25 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 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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 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 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0577 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 9, 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 |
| Feb 9, 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 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0657 |
| Feb 9, 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 |
| Feb 9, 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 |
| Feb 9, 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 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0868 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882 |
| Feb 9, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574 |
| Sep 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0658 |
| Aug 5, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 5, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 5, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 5, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 5, 2022 | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (14 → 4).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 5 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $6,368.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2025 | Fine | $6,368 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 3.42 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 43% in Missouri; bottom 33% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.52 | 0.49 | 0.69 | top 34% in Missouri; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.08 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 46% in Missouri; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.31 | 0.33 | 0.48 | top 39% in Missouri; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 68.4 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 21% in Missouri; bottom 7% 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 3.87, RN 0.59, weekend 3.48.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.87 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Stonebridge Desoto. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 / 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 |
| Busey Corporation | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/10/2023 |
| Cook, Kellie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2011 |
| 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 | 03/12/2008 |
| Eldercare Management Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/16/2025 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/25/2016 |
| Lessor, Jennie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/16/2023 |
| Lessor, Jennie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/16/2023 |
| Lierman Family Co IV, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/12/2008 |
| 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 |
| Lum, Laurence | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Lum, Laurence | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Miller, Beth | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/17/2023 |
| Thayer, Jeanne | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2021 |
Showing 20 of 22 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 2 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Stonebridge Senior Living — 12 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 11 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hillcrest Care Center INC | 4.2 mi | De Soto, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Baisch Nursing Center | 4.4 mi | De Soto, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Superior Manor of Festus, LLC | 10.7 mi | Festus, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Crystal Oaks | 11.8 mi | Festus, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Fountainbleau Nursing Center | 11.9 mi | Festus, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| St Joe Manor | 12.1 mi | Bonne Terre, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Scenic Wellness and Rehabilitation Center | 14.6 mi | Herculaneum, MO | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Gardens Health and Rehab, the | 15.9 mi | Potosi, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| NHC Healthcare, Desloge | 15.9 mi | Desloge, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Country Meadows | 16.1 mi | Park Hills, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Potosi Manor | 16.6 mi | Potosi, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Arbor View Nursing and Rehabilitation | 19.0 mi | Cedar Hill, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Jefferson, MO — 11 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 265772.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details