Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at South Hampton Place during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Infection prevention and control was deficient when staff failed to follow EBP and hand hygiene practices during resident care. An LPN provided wound care to one resident with a pressure ulcer and catheter without a gown, missed hand hygiene opportunities, placed wound care supplies directly on the bed without a protective barrier, and did not change gloves or clean hands between wound care tasks. Another resident with a feeding tube and catheter received tube feeding assistance without a gown, and the LPN said he/she did not know the resident was on EBP.
Failure to assess skin on readmission and obtain wound care orders. A resident returned from the hospital, but staff did not document the required skin assessment. During observation, an unlabeled bandage was found on the back of the resident’s left leg, and when removed, a large open area was seen. An LPN said the wound was not known to staff and no wound care order could be found; the DON and administrator said a skin assessment should have been completed on readmission and the nurse would obtain physician orders if a skin concern was identified.
Surveyors found that the facility’s admission and valuables policies contained language stating the facility would not be responsible for resident money or personal items above a set dollar amount and would not be liable for lost or stolen items except in limited circumstances, effectively requiring residents or their representatives to waive facility liability for personal belongings. Review of records for two residents showed that, although admission agreements were properly signed, required Resident Inventory Listing forms were not completed, contrary to the facility’s own personal property policy. The administrator reported that the staff member responsible for inventories had left and not been replaced and stated that corporate legal guidance was that the facility was not required to replace stolen or missing items, with replacement handled only on a case-by-case basis.
The facility failed to provide required abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation training, including all seven components of its Abuse Prohibition Program, to two newly hired direct-care staff. Personnel file reviews showed no documentation of this training at orientation, and both a CNA and a nurse aide reported they had not received abuse and neglect education. The staffing coordinator stated that orientation only covered reporting abuse and neglect, not screening, prevention, identification, investigation, protection, or response, and acknowledged staff might not know what is reportable. The administrator and DON believed new staff were receiving comprehensive abuse training but did not attend orientation and were unaware that in-depth training was not being provided.
A cognitively intact resident discovered a credit card out of place and another card missing, then identified unauthorized charges on a bank statement. Review of records showed an online transaction for a computer repair store purchase, with a receipt indicating payment using the resident’s card and a photo from the shop showing a nurse aide present at the time of the purchase. The shop owner reported that the nurse aide used the resident’s credit card to buy a laptop, while the aide admitted being at the shop and recognizing the photo but denied using the card, despite acknowledging knowledge of the stolen card and fraudulent charges. The facility’s abuse policy prohibits misappropriation of resident property, and the administrator stated staff should not take resident belongings.
Staff failed to timely report an allegation of misappropriation of a cognitively intact resident’s debit/credit card to the State Survey Agency within the required 24-hour timeframe. The resident reported the card missing and identified unauthorized transactions, and staff documented the report and left a message for the administrator to call, but no clear information about the allegation was conveyed and no report to the state was documented. Review of facility records and the state complaint/self-report database showed no evidence that the allegation was reported as required by the facility’s abuse and misappropriation policy, despite leadership stating that such incidents should be immediately reported up the chain of command so DHSS could be notified.
Staff failed to provide and document pressure ulcer care according to professional standards for two residents admitted with pressure injuries. One resident with a stage 2 sacral ulcer did not receive a complete wound assessment per facility policy, had no documented weekly skin assessments for several weeks, and had multiple ordered wound treatments to the sacrum and inner thigh missing from the TAR, with no notes of refusals. RD recommendations for a wound-healing protein supplement were not converted into physician orders. Another resident with a stage 3 ulcer and incontinence had ordered treatments to the left heel and buttocks/right sacral area that were not documented on the TAR on several days, and progress notes did not address these missed treatments or refusals. The DON and administrator confirmed expectations for weekly skin assessments, full wound documentation, completion of ordered treatments, and follow-up on RD recommendations, which were not met.
Staff failed to provide protective oversight during a shower for a resident with cognitive and mobility impairments, resulting in a fall with major injury, and did not use a gait belt during a transfer for another resident requiring two-person assistance, contrary to safe transfer protocols.
Two nurse aides were allowed to provide direct care beyond the required 120-day period without completing the mandated training program or obtaining certification. The facility lacked a policy on timely training completion, and during a period when in-house classes were unavailable, there was no documentation of efforts to enroll aides in external programs. Communication gaps among the RN, DON, and administration contributed to the deficiency.
Infection Control Failures During Wound Care and EBP Care
Penalty
Summary
Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program was deficient when facility staff failed to follow infection control practices during wound care and care for residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). The facility’s policy stated that EBP requires gown and glove use during high-contact care for residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices, and that hand hygiene must be performed even when gloves are used. The facility also had no policy directing staff on when to place a barrier before wound care supplies were set down. One resident had a stage two pressure ulcer and an indwelling catheter. During observation, an LPN provided wound care without a gown, left the room without performing hand hygiene, returned with wound care supplies and placed them directly on the bed without a protective barrier, and did not wash hands before applying gloves or put on a gown before wound care. The LPN cleansed the wound and applied the clean bandage without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene between tasks. The resident’s catheter bag and tubing were also observed touching the floor. The LPN stated he/she did not know where the gown and gloves were located, did not notice the EBP sign on the door, and acknowledged that placing wound care items directly on the bed without a protective barrier could create an infection control issue. A second resident had severe cognitive impairment, a feeding tube, and an indwelling catheter. Observation showed no EBP signage on the room entrance, and an LPN provided tube feeding assistance without wearing a gown. The LPN stated he/she did not know the resident was on EBP and was not trained to use a gown when providing tube feeding assistance. The administrator and DON stated staff were directed to wear a gown and gloves for residents on EBP and that wound care supplies should be placed on a protective barrier, with hand hygiene performed before gloving, when gloves are changed, and before exiting the room.
Failure to Assess Skin on Readmission and Obtain Wound Care Orders
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to provide services consistent with professional standards of practice when a resident was readmitted from the hospital and the medical record did not contain documentation of a required skin assessment. The facility policy directed a licensed nurse to complete a physical skin evaluation upon admission or readmission, document findings, and notify the health care provider if a skin condition was present. However, the record did not show that staff completed the readmission skin assessment as required. During observation, the resident had an unlabeled bandage on the back of the left leg, and when the nurse removed it, a large open area was seen on the back of the left leg. In interviews, the LPN said staff should assess and document skin concerns and report them to the DON and physician, but he/she did not know the resident had a wound and could not find an order for wound care treatment. The DON said staff should have completed a skin assessment upon readmission and stated he/she did not know the resident had any wounds, and the administrator said the charge nurse should perform the skin assessment upon readmission and the nurse would contact the physician to obtain wound care orders.
Noncompliant Admission Liability Language and Missing Resident Property Inventories
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to ensure that admission policies and documents complied with requirements regarding resident property and financial protections. Review of the facility’s undated "Cash and Valuables Policy Update" showed language stating the facility would not be responsible for any money or personal items exceeding a $40.00 limit. The admission agreement dated 02/2018 further stated the facility would not be liable for any resident items that were lost or stolen, except for items noted for replacement under state guidelines. These provisions effectively required residents and/or responsible parties to waive facility liability for loss or damage to personal belongings as a condition of admission, contrary to regulatory requirements that residents not be required to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of admission, and that they be informed of what care the facility does not provide. In addition, the facility did not follow its own "Personal Property" policy dated 12/2024, which required that residents’ personal belongings and clothing be inventoried and documented upon admission and as items were replenished. Record review for two residents showed that, although admission agreements were signed and dated by the residents/responsible parties and a facility representative in April 2026, there was no documentation that staff completed a Resident Inventory Listing form for either resident. During an interview, the administrator stated that the staff person responsible for completing inventory lists had quit and had not been replaced, and acknowledged that inventory sheets for these residents could not be located. The administrator also reported that the corporate legal department advised that in Missouri the facility was not required to replace stolen or missing items, and that the policy stated the facility was not responsible for replacing missing or stolen items except on a case-by-case basis.
Failure to Provide Required Abuse and Neglect Training to New Staff
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide required training on abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property, and the reporting and prevention of such incidents to two staff members. Facility policy, dated 03/2025, required that all staff be trained on the Abuse Prohibition Program during orientation, annually, and on an ongoing basis, and specified seven components: screening, training, prevention, identification, investigation, protection, and reporting/response. Review of CNA B’s personnel file, with a hire date of 03/27/26, showed no documentation that this abuse and neglect training, including the seven required components, was provided during orientation. In an interview, CNA B stated he/she did not receive orientation upon hire and did not receive abuse and neglect training. Similarly, review of NA C’s personnel file, with a hire date of 04/02/26, showed no documentation of abuse and neglect training that included the seven required components during orientation. In an interview, NA C confirmed he/she did not receive abuse and neglect training. The staffing coordinator reported that during orientation he/she only educated staff to report abuse and neglect, and did not cover screening, training, prevention, identification, investigation, protection, and response to abuse and neglect, and acknowledged that if staff did not know what qualifies as abuse and neglect, they might not know what is reportable. The administrator and DON each stated that new staff should receive or did receive comprehensive abuse and neglect training including all seven components, but both acknowledged they did not attend orientation sessions and were unaware that the staffing coordinator was not providing in-depth training as required by facility policy.
Misappropriation of Resident Credit Card by Staff Member
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to protect a cognitively intact resident from misappropriation of personal property when a nurse aide allegedly used the resident’s credit card without permission for personal purchases. The facility’s Abuse, Prevention and Prohibition Policy, dated 03/2025, prohibits misappropriation of resident property by the owner, licensee, administrator, employee, or agent of the facility. The resident, admitted on 09/15/22 and assessed as cognitively intact on a quarterly MDS dated 02/25/26, reported keeping a credit card in the top dresser drawer and noticing it on the floor, which prompted the resident to check a wallet and discover another credit card missing. Upon reviewing bank statements, the resident identified unauthorized charges on the credit card. Record review showed an online bank statement dated 02/21/26 with an unauthorized transaction of $145.76 at a computer repair store. A photo from the computer shop time-stamped 10:44 A.M. showed Nurse Aide A at the store, and a computer repair shop receipt dated 02/21/26 at 10:51 A.M. documented a $145.76 charge paid with the resident’s credit card. During interview, the repair shop owner stated that Nurse Aide A entered the shop around 10:50 A.M. on 02/21/26 and used the resident’s credit card to purchase a laptop. In a separate interview, Nurse Aide A acknowledged being in the repair shop and confirmed the picture was of him/her but denied using the resident’s credit card, while also stating awareness that the resident’s credit card had been stolen and had fraudulent charges. The administrator stated in interview that staff should not take resident belongings.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Misappropriation of Resident’s Debit/Credit Card
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to timely report an allegation of misappropriation of a resident’s debit/credit card to the State Survey Agency (SSA) within the required 24-hour timeframe. The facility’s Abuse, Prevention and Prohibition Policy, dated 03/2025, directed that all alleged violations involving misappropriation of resident property be reported immediately to the administrator or designee, and that the person made aware of the allegation report it to the mandated state agency and law enforcement. The facility’s investigation, dated 02/23/26, showed the resident reported a missing debit card to an agency nurse sometime between 02/20/26 and 02/21/26 and reported fraudulent charges on the account. A progress note dated 02/21/26 documented that the resident reported the credit card stolen from his/her wallet and that unauthorized transactions were found, and that staff left a message for the administrator to call. The investigation record did not contain documentation that SSA was notified within 24 hours, and review of the Department of Health and Senior Services complaint/facility self-report database showed no documentation that the facility reported the allegation of misappropriation of property. Resident #1’s quarterly MDS, dated 02/25/26, showed the resident was cognitively intact and had been admitted on 09/15/22. During interview, the resident stated he/she reported the missing credit card and unauthorized charges to staff on 02/21/26. The administrator stated that if staff were aware of misappropriation of a resident’s property, the incident should be immediately reported up the chain of command and that he/she was responsible for reporting to the state agency, but reported not knowing about the allegation until 02/23/26. The administrator acknowledged receiving a message from a nurse on 02/21/26, attempting to call back without reaching the nurse, and that the nurse did not leave a message explaining the reason for the call, after which the administrator forgot to call again. The DON stated staff were directed to immediately report allegations of misappropriation of a resident’s property to the administrator or charge nurse so DHSS could be called to file a report.
Failure to Assess and Document Pressure Ulcer Care and Implement RD Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to provide necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing of existing pressure ulcers for two residents who were admitted with pressure injuries. For one resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a stage 2 sacral pressure ulcer present on admission, the admission skin assessment documented only basic wound information (location, stage, and measurements) and did not include a full wound assessment as required by facility policy, such as drainage, tissue type, wound edges, or surrounding tissue. After admission, the electronic medical record contained no documentation that staff completed any skin assessments from the day after admission through several weeks later, despite the resident being at risk for pressure ulcers and having documented pressure ulcer care needs. The same resident had a hospital skin care team recommendation for specific topical products to multiple areas and an RD progress note recommending a wound-healing protein supplement twice daily, but there was no corresponding physician order for the nutritional supplement on the POS. The POS did contain multiple wound care orders for the sacral area, left inner thigh abrasion, and right buttock over the course of the stay, including use of Triad, calcium alginate, Duoderm, and Vashe wet-to-dry dressings. However, the TAR showed missing documentation of ordered wound treatments to the sacral area and left inner thigh on multiple dates, and the progress notes did not document that these treatments were missed or refused. Interviews with the DON and Administrator confirmed that nurses were expected to complete weekly skin assessments, document full wound assessments per policy, and implement and document RD recommendations, but this did not occur. For the second resident, who was re-admitted with severe cognitive impairment, incontinence, and a stage 3 pressure ulcer present on admission, the care plan directed staff to administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness. The POS included orders to apply border gauze to the left heel each dayshift and Triad paste to the buttocks/right sacral area every shift. Review of the TAR showed that staff did not document completion of these ordered treatments to the left heel and buttocks/right sacral area on several dates. As with the first resident, the progress notes contained no documentation explaining the missed treatments or indicating that the resident refused them. The DON stated that nurses were responsible for completing wound treatments as ordered and documenting them on the TAR, but could not explain why the treatments were not documented as completed.
Failure to Provide Adequate Supervision and Safe Transfer Practices
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to prevent a fall with major injury by not providing adequate supervision to a resident during a shower. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment, lower extremity impairment, Parkinson's Disease, a history of falls, and required assistance with personal care, was allowed to shower alone despite requiring staff supervision or touching assistance for showers and ambulation. Staff left the resident unattended in the shower room, honoring the resident's preference for privacy, and only checked on the resident periodically from outside the closed door. As a result, the resident was found on the shower room floor with a fractured pelvis and shoulder. Additionally, staff failed to use a gait belt during a transfer for another resident who required assistance from two staff members for toileting. The care plan for this resident did not specify the use of a gait belt during transfers, and staff did not use one when assisting the resident to the toilet. Both the CNA and the nurse aide involved in the transfer stated that they were not required to use a gait belt, and the administrator and DON were unaware that staff were not using gait belts during transfers for this resident. These deficiencies were identified through observation, interviews, and record review, and involved a lack of protective oversight and failure to follow safe transfer practices for residents with known risks for falls and injury.
Failure to Ensure Timely Nurse Aide Training and Certification
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to ensure that two nurse aides completed the required nurse aide training program within four months of employment, as mandated. Review of personnel files for both nurse aides showed no documentation of program completion, despite both having been employed beyond the allowable period. The facility did not have a policy regarding the completion of nurse aide training within four months, and there was a lapse in the facility's ability to provide training classes due to a temporary loss of their license. During this period, there was no evidence that alternative arrangements were made to enroll nurse aides in external training programs. Interviews with staff revealed confusion and lack of communication regarding responsibility for ensuring nurse aide certification. The Registered Nurse responsible for conducting training was unaware if administration sought alternative classes during the facility's training suspension. The DON and administrator both acknowledged that nurse aides continued to provide direct care after exceeding the 120-day training window without certification. The administrator admitted to not knowing the aides were uncertified and still working, and the DON confirmed that uncertified aides should not have been providing care after the required period.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 82 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Columbia
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Columbia Manor Health & Rehabilitation | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Bluffs, The | 2.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 18 | 0 |
| Neighborhoods Rehabilitation And Skilled Nursing B | 2.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 2 |
| Lenoir Health Care Center | 2.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Parkside Manor | 4.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for South Hampton Place.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.