How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Stonebridge Florissant
6768 North Highway 67, Florissant, MO 63034 (opens Google Maps) · St. Louis County · (314) 741-9101· 120 certified beds · avg 71 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1989 · 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★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 22, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.53
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: 2/5 · 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 37 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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. F-0727
The 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
View all 37 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than 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 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0727 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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). · F-0628 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · from a complaint · F-0635 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
| Apr 21, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Sep 19, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0727 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | 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. · F-0880 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 · F-0677 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0550 |
| Feb 28, 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 28, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0693 |
| Feb 28, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
| Feb 28, 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. · F-0842 |
| Nov 3, 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| May 25, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 25, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 25, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| May 25, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0580 |
| May 25, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| May 25, 2021 | 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 25, 2021 | 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. · F-0658 |
| May 25, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661 |
| May 25, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 25, 2021 | 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 |
| May 25, 2021 | 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 |
| May 25, 2021 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (14 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | E |
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: 3.53
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.24
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.90
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) | 3.53 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 47% in Missouri; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.24 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 16% in Missouri; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.90 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 38% in Missouri; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.14 | 0.33 | 0.48 | bottom 10% in Missouri; bottom 4% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 75.9 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 8% in Missouri; bottom 3% 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 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 3.28, RN 0.23, weekend 2.69.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.28 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Stonebridge Florissant. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lierman, Mark | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 11/01/2021 |
| Amin, Iqbal | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2008 |
| Amin, Iqbal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2008 |
| 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 |
| Butz, Greg | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/15/2020 |
| Butz, Greg | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/15/2020 |
| Cooper, Donna | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/19/2022 |
| Cooper, Donna | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/19/2022 |
| 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 | 02/14/2017 |
| Eldercare Management Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/22/2025 |
| Enterprise Bank & Trust | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/10/2023 |
| Forvis Mazars LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/25/2016 |
| Lierman Family Co III LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2004 |
| Lierman, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/27/2005 |
| 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 |
Showing 20 of 26 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 6 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
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.
- Stonebridge Hermann — Hermann, MO · overall 5/5
- Stonebridge Lake Ozark — Osage Beach, MO · overall 5/5
- Stonebridge Marble Hill — Marble Hill, MO · overall 4/5
- Stonebridge Maryland Heights — Maryland Heights, MO · overall 2/5
- Stonebridge Oak Tree — Jefferson City, MO · overall 4/5
- Stonebridge Owensville — Owensville, MO · overall 3/5
- Stonebridge Villa Marie — Jefferson City, MO · overall 1/5
- Stonebridge Westphalia — Westphalia, MO · overall 3/5
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.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How can my family member make private phone or video calls, and can we see where?"
- "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
- "If you manage my family member's personal funds, how often will we get statements and how quickly are funds returned?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "When a new resident arrives, how do you make sure the doctor's orders for their care and medications are in place from day one?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Missouri midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 76% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 26 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 85 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pillars of North County Health & Rehab Center, the | 2.3 mi | Florissant, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hidden Lake Health Care Center | 2.5 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lakeview Post Acute | 2.8 mi | Florissant, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Delmar Gardens North | 2.8 mi | Black Jack, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Atrium Place Health and Rehabilitation | 2.8 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Christian Extended Care & Rehabilitation | 3.0 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Crestwood Health Care Center | 3.4 mi | Florissant, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Estates of Spanish Lake, the | 4.1 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Rancho Rehab and Healthcare Center | 4.5 mi | Florissant, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Estates of St Louis, LLC, the | 5.2 mi | Saint Louis, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Willowcreek Wellness & Rehabilitation | 5.3 mi | Florissant, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Arbor Hills Care & Rehab Center | 5.7 mi | Ferguson, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
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.
- Stonebridge Maryland Heights — Maryland Heights, 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
- Aberdeen Heights — Kirkwood, MO · overall 5/5
- Aegis Health and Rehabilitation — Wildwood, MO · overall 1/5
- Amberwood Estates Nursing and Rehabilitation — Saint Louis, MO · overall 1/5
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 265365.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).