Deficiency Index

Cox Medical Centers Meyer Orthopedic and Surgical

Springfield, Missouri · CCN 265289

6 surveys since 2010, and no finding has been recorded at harm level.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
19
Surveys
6
Harm or worse
0
Immediate jeopardy
0
The record, 2010–2026
’10’15’20’25’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Harm or worseNone

No finding on record has been cited at harm level or above.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file4/6

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
28
Ownership
Non profit - Corporation
Chain
Independent
County
Greene
Medicare-certified since
1985

CMS ratings

Overall
4
Health inspection
4
Staffing
4
Quality measures
—

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=9, floor 20).

Last survey on record

Apr 23, 2026

200 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day10.004.52
Registered-nurse hours per resident day8.27—
Annual nurse turnover54.5%45.3%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD666.7%E222.2%F111.1%
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 9 of the 19 citations on record.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Cox Medical Centers Meyer Orthopedic and Surgical, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF838Apr 23, 2026

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and update the comprehensive facility assessment annually, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements. Failure to develop and update the comprehensive facility assessment annually could delay the services needed to care for the residents in day-to-day operations and in emergencies. This failure could affect all facility occupants. The facility census was 7. Review showed the facility did not provide a policy regarding the facility assessment. 1. Review showed the facility did not provide a facility assessment document. During an interview on 04/22/26, at 4:36 P.M., the Administrator said she thought the facility assessment was completed in May 2025 prior to her taking over as administrator. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF689Apr 23, 2026

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident environment remained as free from accident hazards as possible when the facility had water temperatures in excess of 120 degrees Fahrenheit ( F) in multiple resident rooms. The facility had a census of 7.Review of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) document Avoiding Tap Water Scalds, dated 03/2012, showed the following:-Most injuries involving tap water scalds are to the elderly and children under the age of five;-The CPSC urges all users to lower their water heaters to 120 degrees F;-Most adults will suffer third-degree burns if exposed to 150 degrees F water for two seconds;-Burns will also occur with a six-second exposure to 140 degrees F water or with a thirty second… […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF700Apr 23, 2026

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess risks of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation, failed to ensure that the beds dimensions were appropriate for each resident's size and weight, and failed to develop and implement interventions for the use of side rails on the residents' care plans for three residents (Resident #2, Resident #10, and Resident #11). The facility's census was 7.Review showed the facility did not provide a policy regarding the use of side rails. 1. Review of Resident #2's face sheet (admission data) showed the resident admitted to the facility on [DATE]. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF550Apr 23, 2026

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide dignity and respect to a resident during a wound care treatment when a staff member argued with one resident (Resident #4) who attempted to direct his/her own care. The facility census was 7.Review of the facility's policy titled Patient [NAME] of Rights, undated, showed the following:-The purpose of the Patient [NAME] of Rights is to inform patients and their family members of their rights and responsibilities;-The facility has defined patient rights and responsibilities to comply with the patient Self-Determination Act, (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (Hippa) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and other applicable regulations and organizational values;-Patients have the right to be… […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF693Apr 23, 2026

    Based on record review, observation and interview the facility failed to obtain specific flush orders and dressing change orders and failed to ensure the physician orders specified which tube staff should administer medications through and which tube staff should administer feedings though for one resident (Resident #5) who had a gastrostomy tube (G-tube - a surgically placed device providing direct access to the stomach for feeding, fluids, and medications when a person cannot eat enough by mouth) and a jejunostomy tube (J-tube - a long-term feeding tube surgically placed through the abdomen directly into the small intestine's middle section (jejunum) to deliver nutrients and medication). The facility's census was 7. […]

Read all 19 findings in full →

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Apr 23, 2026Standard and complaint6 findings
  • Jun 30, 2022Standard3 findings
  • Jul 27, 2017Standard5 findings
  • Sep 8, 2016Standard1 finding
  • Jan 6, 2012—3 findings
  • Dec 1, 2010—1 finding

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction