DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER

410 H ROAD, SIKESTON, MO 63801 (573) 471-7683
For profit - Limited Liability company 70 Beds PARADIGM SENIOR MANAGEMENT Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
70/100
#64 of 479 in MO
Last Inspection: October 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Daybreak Nursing Center in Sikeston, Missouri has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice, though not without some concerns. It ranks #64 out of 479 facilities statewide, placing it in the top half of Missouri nursing homes, and is #3 out of 5 in Scott County, meaning only two local options are better. The facility's performance has been stable, with 5 issues reported in both 2023 and 2024. Staffing is a weak point, earning only 1 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 62%, which is about average for Missouri. However, there have been no fines reported, which is a positive sign. Specific incidents noted during inspections included the failure to provide a safe and clean environment, as evidenced by peeling paint and exposed sheetrock in resident rooms. Additionally, some residents did not receive adequate personal hygiene care, and there were issues with medication storage and labeling, which could potentially endanger residents' health. While the facility has strong health inspection scores and no fines, these concerns highlight areas that need improvement.

Trust Score
B
70/100
In Missouri
#64/479
Top 13%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Holding Steady
5 → 5 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
62% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Missouri facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 17 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Missouri. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 5 issues
2024: 5 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 62%

16pts above Missouri avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Chain: PARADIGM SENIOR MANAGEMENT

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (62%)

14 points above Missouri average of 48%

The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record

Oct 2024 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike envi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 65. Review of the facility's policy titled, Homelike Environment, revised February 2021, showed: - Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment and encouraged to use their personal belongings to the extent possible; - The facility staff and management maximizes, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized, homelike setting which includes a clean, sanitary and orderly environment. Observations on 10/07/24 at 2:12 P.M., and 10/09/24 at 2:26 P.M., showed several areas of peeled paint and exposed sheetrock located at the head of the bed located by the window in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observations on 10/08/24 at 2:16 P.M., and 10/09/24 at 2:30 P.M., showed a large area of peeled paint and exposed sheetrock on the wall beside the bed located by the window in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observations on 10/08/24 at 2:19 P.M., and 10/09/24 at 2:34 P.M., showed a long, narrow opening in the wall with several areas of peeled paint and exposed sheetrock behind the headboard of the bed located by the window in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observations on 10/09/24 at 3:04 P.M., and 10/09/24 at 4:02 P.M., of the shower room located by the Director of Nursing (DON) office, showed: - A trash can overflowed with gowns, gloves and miscellaneous trash; - Several used gloves lay on the floor by the trash can; - [NAME] stained areas on top of the toilet lid; - [NAME] smeared areas on the shower curtain by the toilet; - A shower drain broken and bent with a buildup of grime and dirt; - The bottom edges of the shower stall floor with a buildup of black grime and missing caulk; - A dried brown substance on a yellow trash can lid; - A dried brown substance on a green trash can lid; - A soiled wash cloth lay at the bottom of the whirlpool tub; - An open bag of potato chips lay on top of a towel on the clean linen shelf by the whirlpool tub. Observation on 10/10/24 at 9:16 A.M., showed several areas of peeled paint and deep scrapes on the bottom part of the door upon entering room [ROOM NUMBER]. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 9:19 A.M., the resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] said he/she would like someone to paint the door because it looked bad and was missing a door cover at the bottom of it. Observation on 10/10/24 at 1:12 P.M., showed a whole in the bottom of the bathroom door approximately four inches (in.) by two in. located in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Review of the Maintenance log, dated 09/05/24 through 10/05/24, showed no areas of concern addressed. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 8:36 A.M., Housekeeper B said he/she did not always report things that needed to be addressed by the maintenance department. He/She should be more proactive in this area. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 8:42 A.M., Housekeeper C said he/she had reported things to maintenance to be repaired and wrote them down on the maintenance log located at the nurse's station. He/She also verbally told maintenance when something needed to be repaired. Everything should be on the maintenance log that he/she had reported. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 11:44 A.M., Shower Aide E said whoever gave the showers should be cleaning up the shower room afterwards to ensure cleanliness. Staff should not be eating food and/or leaving food in the shower rooms. During an interview 10/10/24 at 11:59 A.M., the Maintenance Supervisor (MS) said staff would verbally tell him/her about environmental concerns. He/She would prefer staff to write down environmental concerns and repairs on the maintenance log at the nurse's station. Staff had been told to write down any issues needing addressed in the past. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 1:51 P.M., the Director of Operations (DOP) said she would expect staff to write down any environmental concerns or repairs needed for the MS to be addressed in a timely manner.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate personal hygiene for one resident (R...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate personal hygiene for one resident (Resident #10) out of 16 sampled residents and two additional residents (Resident #2 and #57) and failed to provide showers at least twice a week for one resident (Resident #2) outside the sample. The facility census was 65. Review of the facility's policy titled, Dignity, revised February 2021, showed: - Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem; - Residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times; - The facility culture supports dignity and respect for residents by honoring resident goals, choices, preferences, values and beliefs; - This begins with the initial admission and continues throughout the resident's facility stay; - Individual needs and preferences of the resident are identified through the assessment process; - When assisting with care, residents are supported in exercising their rights. For example, residents are: groomed as they wish to be groomed (hair styles, nails, facial hair, etc.); encouraged to attend the activities of their choice, including religious, political, civic, recreational, or social activities; encouraged to dress in clothing that they prefer; allowed to choose when to sleep, eat and conduct activities of daily living; and provided with a dignified dining experience. 1. Review of Resident #2's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment completed by facility staff), dated 08/14/24, showed: - Partial or moderate assistance for personal hygiene; - Substantial/maximum assistance for bathing. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 07/18/24, showed: - Activities of daily living (ADL) self-care performance deficit related to paralysis and weakness. Required monitoring to ensure safe and adequate completion of ADL's due to weakness and impaired cognitive/communication ability; - Usually able to wash part of him/herself in the shower but needed substantial assist of one to complete a shower safely and adequately. Assess for adequate completion and offer assist as needed; - Assist as needed with transfers in and out of the bath/shower. Review of the facility's shower schedule showed Resident #2 scheduled for showers three days weekly on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. Review of the resident's shower sheets, dated 08/01/24-10/09/24, showed: - For August 2024, 13 missed out of 14 opportunities for showers and nail care; - For September 2024, 12 missed out 12 opportunities for showers and nail care; - For October 2024, three missed out of four opportunities for showers and nail care. Observations of the resident on 10/07/24 at 11:29 A.M., and 10/08/24 at 8:30 A.M., showed the resident's hair greasy and toenails long and untrimmed. During an interview on 10/09/24 at 11:50 A.M., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said there were only two shower sheets for Resident #2 because the resident was care planned to do showers by him/herself. During an interview on 10/09/24 at 3:48 P.M., Resident #2 said he was unable to wash his/her hair, back, lower legs and feet by him/herself. He/She would prefer to receive showers more often and would like his/her toenails trimmed. 2. Review of Resident #10's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed: - Dependent on staff for assistance for personal hygiene. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 07/25/24, showed: - ADL self-care performance deficit due to history of a stroke. Needed assist to complete most ADL's; - Personal hygiene needed extensive to full assist of one staff to complete personal hygiene tasks. Observations of the resident on 10/107/24 at 11:32 A.M., 10/08/24 at 8:33 A.M., 10/09/24 at 2:00 P.M., and 10/10/24 at 10:08 A.M., showed he/she had facial hair on his/her chin and upper lip. During an interview on 10/07/24 at 11:32 A.M., Resident #10 said he/she had facial hair on his/her chin and upper lip and would like it to be shaved, but the staff would not shave it. 3. Review of Resident #57's annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed: - Dependent on staff for assistance for personal hygiene. Review of the resident's care plan, dated 07/30/24 showed: - Severely impaired cognitive, communication, and functional status, and dependent on staff for all ADL's; - Dependent on staff for completion of hygiene. Shave on shower days and as needed. Review of the facility's shower schedule showed the resident scheduled for showers three days weekly on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Review of the resident's shower sheets, dated 08/24/24-10/10/24, showed: - For August 2024, 13 missed out of 13 opportunities for nail care; - For September 2024, 13 missed out of 13 opportunities for nail care; - For October 2024, four missed out of four opportunities for nail care. Observations on 10/07/24 at 3:38 P.M. and 10/9/24 at 3:20 P.M., showed the resident lay in bed with untrimmed toenails and fingernails and several areas of flaky dry skin. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 10:45 A.M., Shower Aide E said he/she didn't do all of the showers, because the Certified Nurse Assistants (CNAs) will do certain residents. He/She always completed a shower sheet even if the resident showered themselves or refused. He/She knew some of the CNAs forgot to complete the sheets. The nurses should be doing the diabetic residents' nails, but otherwise the CNAs should be doing them. Sometimes the staff would forget to document they checked/clipped the residents' nails. Any of the CNAs could cut the residents' nails unless they were diabetic. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 2:13 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she would expect a shower sheet to be completed every time a resident took a shower or refused a shower. She would expect the CNAs to complete nail care and nurses to complete nail care for the diabetic residents.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store medications in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice. This deficient practice had the potential t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store medications in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility also failed to properly label medications in a safe and effective manner. The facility's census was 65. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Labeling and Storage, dated 2001, showed: - Medications requiring refrigeration are stored in a refrigerator located in the medication room at the nurses station or other secured location. Medications are stored separately from food and are labeled accordingly; - Policy did not address checking and the appropriate refrigerator temperatures or labeling over the counter medications with an opened date. 1. Review of the Medication Refrigerator Temperature Log, dated 08/01/24 - 10/08/24, showed: - For August 2024, the medication refrigerator's temperature was not documented for 11 out 31 opportunities, and 18 out of the 20 completed temperatures were above 41 degrees; - For September 2024, the medication refrigerator's temperature was not documented for eight out of 30 opportunities, and 21 out of the 22 completed temperatures were above 41 degrees; - For October 2024, the medication refrigerator's temperature was not documented for two out of eight opportunities, and six out of the eight completed temperatures were above 41 degrees. 2. Observation on 10/08/24 at 10:27 A.M., of the medication cart showed: - An opened Byetta (an anti-diabetic medication) injection pen, undated and unlabeled; - One opened bottle of over the counter prenatal vitamins (supplements that contain vitamins for a healthy pregnancy), undated; - One opened bottle of over the counter geritussin (helps to thin mucus), undated; - One opened bottle of over the counter clearlax (used to treat constipation), undated; - One opened bottle of over the counter pepto bismuth (used to treat heartburn or upset stomach), undated; - One opened bottle of over the counter fiber powder (used to treat constipation), undated. During an interview on 10/08/24 at 10:35 A.M., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said sometimes the nurses forgot to write an open date on the over the counter medications when they were opened. The temperature log should be checked daily by the evening nurses. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 11:19 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said that she expected nurses to be checking the refrigerator temperatures daily and the weekend evening nurse had not been doing it like he/she was taught. She did expect staff to write an opened date on over the counter medications when a new bottle was opened.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. These practices had t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. These practices had the potential to affect all residents who are served food from the kitchen. The facility census was 65. 1. Observation on 10/07/24 at 2:24 P.M., of the dry food storage room showed: - A large bag of elbow pasta opened with the top of the bag twisted, not sealed and undated; - Three bags of cereal opened, undated, and one unsealed; - Opened graham cracker crumbs in a labeled box with the bag unsealed. 2. Observation on 10/07/24 at 2:25 P.M., of the storage area showed: - Two large baking sheets with black carbon build up on the sides/bottom. 3. Observation on 10/07/24 at 2:26 P.M., of a white single door residential-style stand up freezer located in the front of the kitchen showed: - Two Ziploc bags of frozen items unlabeled and undated. 4. Observation on 10/07/24 at 2:27 P.M., of a white single door residential-style stand up freezer located in the back of the kitchen showed: - Six bags of frozen items unlabeled and undated. 5. Observation on 10/08/24 at 9:47 A.M., 1:00 P.M., 1:11 P.M., and 1:13 P.M., and 10/09/24 at 2:00 P.M., and 10/10/24 at 12:00 P.M., showed no dietary staff wore hair nets while working and preparing food in the kitchen. 6. Observation on 10/08/24 at 1:13 P.M., of the kitchen staff preparing food showed: - Dietary Aide D knocked two skillets onto the floor from a shelf and put the two skillets back on the shelf; - Dietary Aide D put on gloves, touched the refrigerator, a cutting board and a knife, and then touched a green pepper without changing gloves and performing hand hygiene; - Dietary Aide D used one of the skillets that was knocked onto the floor from the shelf to saute green peppers without changing gloves and performing hand hygiene. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 12:00 P.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) said he/she would expect opened packages of food to be wrapped or put into appropriate storage containers, and to be labeled and dated. He/She would expect kitchen cookware to be free from carbon buildup, the staff to wear hair nets in the kitchen, to change gloves after touching dirty surfaces, and to wash a skillet if it was dropped on the floor before using it to prepare food.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility's census was 65. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility's census was 65. Review of the facility's policy titled, Pest Control, revised May 2008, showed: - The facility shall maintain an effective pest control program; - This facility maintains an on-going pest control program to ensure that the building is kept free of insects and rodents; - Pest control services are provided by a contracted pest control company; - Maintenance services assist, when appropriate and necessary, in providing pest control services. Review of the most recent pest control invoices showed no details of the areas of concern or what treatment was provided. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 1:04 P.M., Resident #34 said he/she saw four or five spiders in his/her room. He/She thought they were brown recluse spiders. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 1:09 P.M., Resident #42 said he/she had seen three spiders in his/her room. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 1:01 P.M., Resident #64 said he/she saw spiders in the facility within the last month. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 1:05 P.M., Resident #26 said on 10/09/24, staff were changing him/her and a spider crawled on his/her back. Resident #26 said luckily, he/she did not get bit, but it was scary having it on his/her back. During an interview on 10/08/24 at 10:51 A.M., Housekeeper A said there had been spiders and the residents had complained about them. Traps were put in the resident's room. He/She didn't know what kind of spiders they were. During an interview on 10/10/24 at 10:46 A.M., the Maintenance Supervisor (MS) said the facility did have a spider issue about 1 1/2 months ago. An outside vendor came in and treated the facility for over two hours. There are still a few spiders reported throughout the facility. MS said the pest control vendor was at the facility on Tuesday for the monthly service and inspection. During an interview on 10/18/2024 at 1:06 P.M., the Administrator said they have a pest control company spray the facility once a month. He/she said they have had a couple residents that said they have seen spiders. The Administrator said he/she has not seen them. He/she said maintenance and housekeepers will check the rooms if someone says they have seen them in their room and maintenance will put out safe spider traps.
May 2023 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean and comfortable homelike enviro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean and comfortable homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Maintenance Service, revised December 2022, showed: - Maintenance shall be provided to all areas of the building, grounds, and equipment; - The maintenance department is responsible for maintaining the buildings, grounds, and equipment in a safe and operable manner at all times; - Functions of maintenance personnel include maintaining the building in good repair and free from hazards and providing routinely scheduled maintenance service to all areas. Observation on 05/16/23 at 10:47 A.M., and 05/17/23 at 11:18 A.M., of the 100 Hall showed: - A ceramic figurine on top of a light fixture above the bed located by the door in room [ROOM NUMBER]; - Three, 4 inch (in.) x 5 in. and two 5 in. x 7 in. picture frames on top of a light fixture above the bed located by the window in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observation on 05/16/23 at 12:03 P.M., and 05/18/23 at 12:18 P.M. of the 100 Hall shower room showed: - A six in. brown smeared substance on a vinyl curtain in front of five shelves containing miscellaneous items located to the left side of the door upon entering; - Three areas of a dried buildup substance on a vinyl privacy curtain located in front of the toileting area; - A six in. x 30 in. ceiling area with peeling paint and blue tape located by a light fixture and air vent; - A six in. x 34 in. area of peeling paint located above and behind the top of toilet lid; - Several missing ceramic tiles with exposed rigid wood edges located on the front of the sink basin. Observation on 05/17/23 at 06:18 P.M., of the 200 Hall shower room showed a build up of dust and debris on an air vent near the shower stall. Record review of the maintenance log binder dated 04/05/23 through 05/17/23 showed no current requests for areas of concern documented. During an interview on 05/18/23 at 09:12 A.M., Housekeeper E said he/she reported any concerns or repairs needed to the supervisor. There was also a maintenance log that staff could write down repairs at the nurse's station. He/she had not written down any thing recently that needed addressed. During an interview on 05/18/23 at 09:22 A.M., Nursing Assistant (NA) F said he/she reported any concerns to the supervisor and would sometimes write needed repairs in the maintenance log book. He/she had not seen anything to report in terms of repairs or environmental issues. During an interview on 05/18/23 at 09:26 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G said there was a maintenance log book to write down any needed repairs. He/she had not reported any environmental issues or other areas of concern recently. During an interview 05/19/23 11:08 A.M., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) D said he/she informed his/her supervisor of any needed repairs and would sometimes write concerns down on the maintenance log. He/she had not reported any environmental concerns recently. During an interview on 05/22/23 at 09:56 A.M., the Administrator said she would expect staff to write down needed repairs or environmental concerns on the maintenance log to be addressed and followed up on in a timely manner.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0637 (Tag F0637)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a federally m...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a federally mandated assessment tool completed by the facility) assessment for one resident (Resident #18) out of three sampled residents. The facility's census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Assessments, dated March 2022 showed: - Significant change in status assessment is a comprehensive assessment for a resident that must be completed when the interdisciplinary team (IDT) (a group of health care professionals from diverse fields who work in a coordinated effort toward a common goal for a resident) has determined that a resident meets the significant change guidelines for either major improvement or decline. 1. Review of Resident #18's medical record showed: - The quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], showed the resident received hospice (health care focused on the quality of life of a terminally ill person) services; - A discharge date of 04/19/23 from hospice services; - The facility failed to complete a significant change MDS within 14 days after the discharge of the resident's hospice services. During an interview on 05/18/23 at 09:15 A.M., the MDS Coordinator said the resident discharged from hospice services on 04/19/23. He/she was new to the MDS role and was not aware of the significant change not being completed. During an interview on 05/18/23 at 02:54 P.M., the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Coordinator said the facility had two different MDS Coordinators in the last month. The significant change MDS was missed on the resident.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0574 (Tag F0574)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on interview, observation and record review the facility failed to provide resident rights information on how to formally file a complaint to the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, observation and record review the facility failed to provide resident rights information on how to formally file a complaint to the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) about the care they were receiving. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, revised February 2021, showed: - Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect and dignity; - Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of the facility; - Be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of property, and exploitation; - Communication with and access to people and services, both inside and outside the facility; - Communicate with outside agencies (e.g., local, state, or federal officials, state and federal surveyors, state long-term ombudsman, protection or advocacy organizations, etc.) regarding any matter. During a group interview on 05/18/23 at 10:56 A.M., five residents (Residents #2, #17, #19, #22, and #50) said they had not been given information or informed on how to make a formal complaint to the DHSS about the care they received. Record review of February, March and April 2023 resident council meeting minutes, showed no documentation of the resident rights information given to the residents in attendance regarding how to file a formal complaint to the DHSS. During an interview on 05/18/23 at 11:07 A.M., the Activity Director said he/she was not aware of any information verbally given to the residents or visible signage with information on how to file a formal complaint to the DHSS. He/she had not went over resident rights which addressed how to make a formal complaint to the DHSS. During an interview on 05/19/23 at 8:15 A.M., the Social Service Director (SSD) said he/she had not informed residents on how to file a formal complaint to the DHSS during the monthly resident council meetings and thought the signage might have been taken down. He/she was still new in the role as the SSD. Observation on 05/19/23 at 9:02 A.M., showed an 8 inch (in.) x 10 in. frame with the DHSS contact information in very small print displayed above wheelchair height on the left side wall of a small hallway leading to the Administrator's office located at the front entrance. During an interview on 05/19/23 at 9:04 A.M., the Administrator said residents should be informed on how to file a formal complaint to the DHSS. She said signage with the DHSS contact information would be placed in a public area accessible for all residents to view. During an interview on on 05/19/23 at 9:17 A.M., Resident #15 said the social security office was called with any complaints he/she has about the care received at the facility. He/she did not have a contact number to call the DHSS and was not aware of how to file a formal complaint about the care being received at the facility.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. These...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and distribute food under sanitary conditions, increasing the risk of cross-contamination and food-borne illness. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Sanitization, revised November 2022, showed: - The food service area is maintained in a clean and sanitary manner; - All utensils, counters, shelves, and equipment are kept clean, maintained in good repair and are free from breaks, corrosions, open seams, cracks, chipped areas that may affect their use or proper cleaning; - All equipment, food contact surfaces and utensils are cleaned and sanitized using heat or chemical sanitizing solutions. Observations on 05/16/23 at 10:02 A.M., 05/16/23 at 02:04 P.M., and 05/17/23 at 09:18 A.M., of the kitchen area showed: - A buildup of a white substance on the top, the sides, and the front panel of the dish machine; - A buildup of a white substance on the front panels and leg supports of the wash, rinse, and sanitize three compartment sink; - A buildup of dust and debris on top of the Manitowoc ice machine; - A buildup of dust on the front panel of the air conditioning wall unit located by the Manitowoc ice machine; - A black baked on substance along the edges of a 3 inch (in.) x 18 in. x 26 in. sheet pan and a 3 in. x 18 in. x 26 in. deep dish pan on a stack with other miscellaneous pans stored on the top shelf located in the pots and pans room. Observation on 05/16/23 at 10:02 A.M., 05/16/23 at 02:04 P.M., and 05/17/23 at 09:18 A.M., of the kitchen area showed no documentation of a kitchen cleaning schedule and/or a kitchen cleaning checklist. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:04 A.M., [NAME] A said cleaning tasks were completed in the kitchen and would expect the equipment, the pots and the pans to be free of white and black substances and dust buildup. There was no documentation to show kitchen tasks had been completed or were on a cleaning schedule. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:06 A.M., Kitchen Aid B said cleaning tasks were completed in the kitchen and would expect the equipment, the pots and the pans to be free of white and black substances and dust buildup. There was no documentation to show kitchen tasks had been completed or on a cleaning schedule. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:08 A.M., Kitchen Aid C said cleaning tasks were completed in the kitchen and would expect the equipment, the pots and the pans to be free of white and black substances and dust buildup. There was no documentation to show kitchen tasks had been completed or on a cleaning schedule. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:16 A.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) said the staff cleans the kitchen area on a daily basis, but there was no documentation at this time. Before the move to the current facility, the kitchen cleaning tasks were on a daily cleaning schedule and signed off on when completed by staff. The kitchen equipment, the pots and the pans should be free of white and black substances and dust buildup. During an interview on 05/22/23 at 09:56 A.M., the Administrator said she would expect the kitchen equipment, the pots and the pans to be free of white and black substances and dust buildup. The kitchen cleaning tasks should be on a cleaning schedule and signed upon completion for review.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Garbage Disposal (Tag F0814)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dumpster was closed at all times and maintained to keep pests out and/or to keep the garbage contained in the dumpste...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dumpster was closed at all times and maintained to keep pests out and/or to keep the garbage contained in the dumpster. The facility census was 53. Review of the facility's policy titled, Sanitization, revised November 2022, showed: - All kitchens, kitchen areas and dining areas are kept clean, free form garbage and debris, and protected from rodents and insects; - Garbage and refuse containers are in good condition, without leaks, and waste is properly contained in dumpsters/compactors with lids (or otherwise covered); - Areas used for garbage disposal are free from odors and waste fats, and maintained to prevent pests. Observations on 05/16/23 at 8:33 A.M., and 05/16/23 at 9:03 A.M., of the outside trash dumpster located near the maintenance shed showed: - The dumpster lid opened; - Several black birds flew out of the opened dumpster; - Three white opened trash bags lay on top of broken down boxes with exposed briefs, tissue paper, miscellaneous wrappers and soda cans; - No staff used the dumpster. Observations on 05/17/23 at 9:18 A.M., and 05/17/23 at 9:55 A.M., of the outside trash dumpster located near the maintenance shed showed: - The dumpster lid opened; - Four black birds perched on top of the opened dumpster; - No staff used the dumpster. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:04 A.M., [NAME] A said staff should make sure the dumpster lid was closed when not in use. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:06 A.M., Kitchen Aid B said staff should make sure the dumpster lid was closed after throwing away trash. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:08 A.M., Kitchen Aid C said when staff throw away trash, the dumpster lid should be closed afterwards. During an interview on 05/16/23 at 10:16 A.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) said the dumpster lid should be closed at all times and when not in use. He/she would expect staff to close the dumpster lid each time trash was disposed. During an interview on 05/19/23 at 11:08 A.M., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) D said staff should close the lid to the dumpster each time trash was thrown away. During an interview on 05/22/23 at 9:56 A.M., the Administrator said she would expect staff to close the dumpster lid after disposing of trash. The dumpster lid should be closed at all times and when not in use.
Oct 2020 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0624 (Tag F0624)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document preparation and orientation for transfer to the hospital f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document preparation and orientation for transfer to the hospital for two residents (Resident #38 and #87) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36. 1. Record review of Resident #38's progress notes showed: - The resident transferred to the hospital on 8/29/20 and not readmitted to the facility. Record review of the resident's medical record did not contain documentation which showed the resident was prepped and oriented for transfer out of the facility. 2. Record review of Resident #87's progress notes showed: - The resident transferred to the hospital on 8/27/20 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - The resident transferred to the hospital on 5/19/20 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of the resident's medical record did not contain documentation which showed the resident was prepped and oriented for transfer out of the facility. During an interview on 10/9/20 at 10:45 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she was sure the staff were doing that and it is just not documented but they will start doing that. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Discharge/Transfer of Resident, dated March 2015, showed the policy did not address documentation for preparation and orientation for transfer.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of assessments for one resident (Resident #10) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36....

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of assessments for one resident (Resident #10) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36. 1. Record review of Resident #10's medical record showed: - A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment to be completed by facility staff, dated 6/30/20, showed the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter (a flexible tube that drains urine from the bladder to a collection bag); - A Physician's Order Sheet (POS), dated 4/09/20, with orders to discontinue urinary catheter; - A care plan for an indwelling catheter, last reviewed 3/31/20. Observation on 10/06/20 at 1:33 P.M. showed Resident #10 had no indwelling urinary catheter. During an interview on 10/06/20 at 2:55 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the resident no longer had a urinary catheter. During an interview on 10/08/20 at 3:45 P.M., the MDS Coordinator said the urinary catheter should not have been on that MDS. He/she had looked through the nurse's notes but had not seen where the catheter had been discontinued. During an interview on 10/09/20 at 10:45 A.M., the DON said she would expect the MDS assessment to be accurate. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Assessment Instrument, dated October 2019, showed Federal regulations require the assessment accurately reflect the resident's status.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized comprehensive care plan with specific interventions for two residents (Resident #32 and #87) out of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized comprehensive care plan with specific interventions for two residents (Resident #32 and #87) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36. 1. Record review of Resident #32's Physician's Order Sheet (POS), dated 10/01/20 through 10/31/20, showed diagnoses of lack of coordination, abnormal gait and mobility, mild cognitive impairment, dizziness and giddiness, repeated falls, orthostatic hypotension (a form of low blood pressure that happens when standing up from sitting or lying down), and muscle weakness. Record review of the resident's quarterly the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility) dated 8/15/20, showed: - Limited physical assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting; - Extensive physical assistance of one staff for locomotion (moving from one place to another), dressing, personal hygiene, and bathing. Record review of the resident's Fall Risk Assessment, dated 5/22/20, showed moderate fall risk. Record review of the resident's progress notes, dated 8/23/20, showed resident found lying on the floor, able to move all extremities with no pain or discomfort. Resident stated he/she had a bump on his/her head that hurt. Hematoma noted to left side of the resident's head. No other injuries noted. Record review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, updated 3/20/20, showed no interventions or plan of care for falls. 2. Record review of Resident #87's POS, dated 10/1/20 through 10/31/20, showed: - Diagnosis of seizures; - An order, dated 9/4/20, for levetiracetam (an anticonvulsant medication) 500 milligram (mg) twice daily. Record review of the resident's progress notes, dated 5/22/20, showed readmit: - Resident on way back to facility; - New diagnosis of new onset seizures; - New order for Keppra (levetiracetam) 500 mg twice daily. Record review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, updated 3/20/20, showed no interventions or plan of care for seizures. During an interview on 10/9/20 at 10:45 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she would expect a resident at risk for falls to have a care plan addressing falls. She would expect a resident with seizures to have a care plan addressing seizures. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan Comprehensive, dated March 2015, showed: - An individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable goals and time frames will be developed to meet the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being; - The comprehensive care plan will be based on a thorough assessment that includes, but is not limited to, the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility); - Assessment of each resident is an ongoing process and the care plan will be revised as changes occur in the resident's condition.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise and update comprehensive care plans with specific interventions to meet the individual needs of two residents (Residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise and update comprehensive care plans with specific interventions to meet the individual needs of two residents (Resident #10 and #87) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36. 1. Record review of Resident #10's Physician's Order Sheet (POS), dated 3/26/20 through 4/22/20, showed an order for discontinuation of urinary catheter (a small, flexible tube that drains urine from the bladder to a collection bag) on 4/09/20. An observation on 10/06/20 at 1:33 P.M. showed Resident #10 did not have an indwelling urinary catheter. Record review of Resident #10's care plan, last reviewed 3/31/20, showed a care plan in place for an indwelling catheter and did not reflect the catheter had been discontinued. 2. Record review of Resident #87's POS, dated 10/1/20 through 10/31/20, showed: - Diagnoses of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic metabolic disorder affecting blood sugar) with diabetic chronic kidney disease, dependent on renal dialysis, end stage renal disease (the final stage of chronic kidney disease when the kidneys are no longer able to work to meet the body's needs), seizures, hypertension, muscle weakness, toxic metabolic encephalopahy (brain dysfunction from failure of other internal organs)and coronary artery disease (a condition causing damage to the major blood vessels that supply the heart with blood, oxygen, and nutrients.) Record review of the resident's nurse's progress notes showed: - On 5/22/20, readmit, - New diagnosis of new onset seizures and hypertension (high blood pressure), New order for Keppra (an anticonvulsant medication) 500 milligram (mg) twice daily, Clonodine patch (an antihypertensive medication) 0.3 mg/24 hour change every 72 hours, and Hydralazine (an antihypertensive medication) 50 mg three times daily. - New order for 1500 milliliter (ml) fluid restriction; - On 8/17/20, resident refused dialysis today; - On 8/19/20, resident is refusing to go to dialysis again today; - On 8/26/20, resident refusing to go to dialysis on this day; - On 8/27/20, resident does not want to go to dialysis again on this day. Resident sent to hospital for altered mental status and seizures; - On 9/14/20, resident left dialysis on 9/11/20 before time to be done, stating he/she didn't feel good. Guardian called with concerns that resident continues to be at times non compliant with this; - On 9/22/20, resident found sitting on bottom in floor, beside bed. No apparent injuries noted. When asked what happened, the resident said he/she slid out of bed onto the floor because the wheelchair doesn't lock right. Denied striking head. Record review of the resident's comprehensive care plan, updated 3/20/20, showed: - Care plan not updated with new order for fluid restriction and not placed on intake and output monitoring; - Care plan not updated for refusals of dialysis; - Care plan not updated with new interventions following fall on 9/22/20. During an interview on 10/08/20 at 3:45 P.M., the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment completed by the facility) Coordinator said he/she is responsible for several homes. Some things may have been missed, but any nurse can update the care plans. During an interview on 10/9/20 at 10:45 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she would expect the care plan to be updated for a resident with a new order for fluid restriction, refusals of dialysis, new interventions after a fall and after an indwelling urinary catheter had been removed. The MDS Coordinator calls on the phone for updates on the residents and makes the residents' changes. The DON said she had not been shown how to make changes in the computer charting and would expect any nurse to be able to update the care plan. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan Comprehensive, dated March 2015, showed the interdisciplinary care plan team is responsible for the periodic review and updating of care plans when a significant change in the resident's condition has occurred, at least quarterly, and when changes occur that impact the resident's care. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Dialysis, Care of a Resident Receiving, dated March 2015, showed: - Residents with fluid restrictions due to dialysis: The resident will be placed on I&O to monitor the resident's fluid intake and output. The physician will be notified of non-compliance. All the above will be addressed on the care plan as indicated.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for one resident (Resident #87) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36. Record review of the ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for one resident (Resident #87) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 36. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Dialysis, Care of a Resident Receiving, dated March 2015, showed: - Checking the Thrill Sensation: Nurses will check the thrill daily and document daily. This will be documented on the resident's treatment record. If no thrill sensation is felt, notify the physician; - Residents with Fluid Restrictions due to Dialysis: The resident will not have a water pitcher in their room. The resident will be placed on I&O (intake and output) to monitor the resident's fluid intake and output. The physician will be notified of non-compliance. All of the above will be addressed on the care plan as indicated. Record review of Resident #87's Physician's Order Sheet (POS), dated 9/01/20 through 9/30/20, showed an order written on 5/29/20 to check bruit (a sound associated with blood flow) and thrill (a tremor or vibration felt by touch to indicate blood flow) in right arm every shift. Record review of Resident #87's POS, dated 10/01/20 through 10/31/20, showed: - Diagnoses of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic metabolic disorder affecting blood sugar) with diabetic chronic kidney disease, dependent on renal dialysis, end stage renal disease (the final stage of chronic kidney disease when the kidneys are no longer able to work to meet the body's needs), seizures, hypertension, muscle weakness, toxic metabolic encephalopahy (brain dysfunction from failure of other internal organs)and coronary artery disease (a condition causing damage to the major blood vessels that supply the heart with blood, oxygen, and nutrients); - An order written on 5/29/20 to check bruit and thrill in right arm every shift not carried over to the October POS. Record review of the resident's Treatment Record showed: - For August 2020, four out of 31 opportunities to check bruit and thrill missed on day shift, 21 out of 31 opportunities missed on evening shift, and three out of 31 opportunities missed on night shift; - For September 2020, four out of 27 opportunities missed on day shift, 19 out of 27 opportunities missed on evening shift, and one out of 27 opportunities on night shift; - For October 2020, no treatment to check bruit and thrill in right arm every shift for 10/1/20 through 10/9/20. During an interview on 10/9/20 at 10:45 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she would expect treatment orders to be followed as written. She would expect the nurse to check the new POS to make sure it was correct.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Missouri facilities.
Concerns
  • • 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
  • • 62% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 70/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Daybreak Nursing Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Missouri, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Daybreak Nursing Center Staffed?

CMS rates DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 62%, which is 16 percentage points above the Missouri average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.

What Have Inspectors Found at Daybreak Nursing Center?

State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER during 2020 to 2024. These included: 11 with potential for harm and 4 minor or isolated issues.

Who Owns and Operates Daybreak Nursing Center?

DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by PARADIGM SENIOR MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 70 certified beds and approximately 64 residents (about 91% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SIKESTON, Missouri.

How Does Daybreak Nursing Center Compare to Other Missouri Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Missouri, DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (62%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Daybreak Nursing Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Daybreak Nursing Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Missouri. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Daybreak Nursing Center Stick Around?

Staff turnover at DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER is high. At 62%, the facility is 16 percentage points above the Missouri average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Daybreak Nursing Center Ever Fined?

DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Daybreak Nursing Center on Any Federal Watch List?

DAYBREAK NURSING CENTER is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.