How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Stonebridge Villa Marie
1030 Edmonds Street, Jefferson City, MO 65109 (opens Google Maps) · Cole County · (573) 635-3381· 120 certified beds · avg 65 residents/day · certified since Oct 3, 1983 · 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 Mar 13, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.30
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: 1/5 · 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 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2026 | 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, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0700 |
| Mar 13, 2026 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not post the names, addresses, and phone numbers of state agencies and advocacy groups, along with a notice that residents may file complaints with the state survey agency. · F-0575 |
| Jul 17, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Jul 17, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Jan 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Jan 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0609 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Aug 9, 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 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Aug 9, 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 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| May 19, 2023 | 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 |
| May 19, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| May 19, 2023 | 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 |
| May 19, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 19, 2023 | 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. · F-0677 |
| May 19, 2023 | 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. · F-0689 |
| May 19, 2023 | 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 |
| May 19, 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 19, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| May 19, 2023 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 8
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 8 | 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: 3.30
Missouri average: 3.66
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.41
Missouri average: 0.49
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.93
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) | 3.30 | 3.66 | 3.95 | bottom 36% in Missouri; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.41 | 0.49 | 0.69 | bottom 49% in Missouri; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.93 | 3.22 | 3.50 | bottom 39% in Missouri; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.34 | 0.33 | 0.48 | top 32% in Missouri; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 74.3 | 56.0 | 45.8 | bottom 9% in Missouri; bottom 4% 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 3.15, RN 0.39, weekend 2.79.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.15 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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Stonebridge Villa Marie. 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% | 03/12/2008 |
| Barnes, Eric | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2013 |
| Barnes, Eric | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2013 |
| 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 |
| 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 | 03/12/2008 |
| Eldercare Management Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/22/2025 |
| 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 VII, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2008 |
| 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 |
| McBryant, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/04/2024 |
Showing 20 of 25 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 5 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 Westphalia — Westphalia, MO · overall 3/5
- Stonebridge Adams Street — Jefferson City, MO · overall 2/5
- Stonebridge Chillicothe — Chillicothe, MO · overall 5/5
- Stonebridge Desoto — De Soto, MO · overall 4/5
- Stonebridge Florissant — Florissant, MO · overall 2/5
- 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
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.
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "Where do you post the contact information for the state agency and the ombudsman, in case we ever need to file a complaint?"
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 74% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 25 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 (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capitol River Wellness & Rehabilitation | 0.5 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stonebridge Adams Street | 0.8 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Heisinger Bluffs Rehab and Healthcare Center | 1.0 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Heisinger Bluffs Healthcare Western Campus | 1.1 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Jefferson City Manor Care Center | 1.4 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| River City Living Community | 2.8 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Stonebridge Oak Tree | 2.8 mi | Jefferson City, MO | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Stonebridge Westphalia | 13.7 mi | Westphalia, MO | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Riverview Nursing Center | 18.3 mi | Mokane, MO | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265208.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).