MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Maranatha Village, Inc. has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it's slightly above average but not outstanding. With a state rank of #97 out of 479 in Missouri, it sits in the top half of facilities, and it's #6 out of 21 in Greene County, meaning only five local options are better. The facility is improving, having reduced its issues from ten in 2024 to just one in 2025. Staffing is a strength, with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 46%, which is below the state average, indicating that staff are more likely to stay and build relationships with residents. Notably, the facility has not incurred any fines, which is a positive sign. However, there have been some concerning incidents, such as a resident experiencing verbal abuse from another resident and staff failing to properly maintain hygiene protocols in the kitchen, as well as not effectively managing infection prevention measures for potential waterborne illnesses. Overall, while Maranatha Village has strengths, families should be aware of these weaknesses when considering care for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Missouri
- #97/479
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 46% 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 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Missouri. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Missouri avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
The Ugly 28 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed provide care per standards of practice to all residents when staff failed to document timely and complete assessments and monito...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure documentation was present in the medical record to support any discharge when staff failed to document to the resident's medical rec...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff treated all residents in a dignified fashion when one staff member (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B) made rude and degrading ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to protect the dignity of all residents when the facility failed to respect one resident's (Resident #50) preference to help wi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed provide respiratory care per standards of practice when staff did not have physician orders for oxygen usage for two resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accommodate one resident's (Resident #88) known dietary preferences. A sample of 33 residents were reviewed in a home with a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide the pneumococcal vaccine as ordered for two residents (Resident #43 and #75) of the seven residents reviewed for immunization out ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the resident and/or responsible party (RP) information rega...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain and update comprehensive care plan to ensure their accuracy when staff failed to care plan the use of usage for fo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
2. Observation on 04/16/24, at 12:20 P.M., showed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 4 was filled a cup with ice from a cooler sitting on the island counter. The CNA opened the cooler took out the scoop, and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain their infection prevention program to reduce the likelihood of a legionella (the bacterium which causes legionnaires...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to allow all resident the right of self-determination when staff failed to honor the one resident's (Resident #1) wishes to have an ambulance ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician of all changes in condition when staff failed to notify the physician that one resident (Resident #1) verbalized a cha...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
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 provide all residents with care per standards of practice when staf...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
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 provide all residents with care of pressure ulcers and pressure sor...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete when staff failed to document an assessment and vital signs for one resident (Resident #1) when the re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
3 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from verbal abuse from anot...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
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 report multiple allegations of resident-to-resident verbal abuse to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0742
(Tag F0742)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide one resident (Resident #1) with psychological services, when his/her roommate/family member (Resident #2) yelled at the resident (...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2021
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN - form CMS-10055) or a denial letter at the initiation, reduction, or...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to protect four residents (Resident #273, #274, #275, and #276) from m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to check criminal background checks (CBC) or Nurse Aide (NA) registry for a Federal Indicator (a registry that indicated a list of individuals...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of misappropriation of resident property to the state licensing agency (Department of Health and Senior Services - DHS...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately investigate an allegation of misappropriation of medications by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A, failed to take steps to prote...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to dispose of expired medications and supplies stored in the 100/200 hall medication storage room and the 300/400 hall medicatio...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2019
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff administered medications with an error r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff was prepared and stored food under sanitary conditions when staff did not keep potentially hazardous food at the...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Missouri facilities.
- • 28 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Maranatha Village, Inc's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC 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 Maranatha Village, Inc Staffed?
CMS rates MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 46%, compared to the Missouri average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Maranatha Village, Inc?
State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC during 2019 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 27 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Maranatha Village, Inc?
MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 120 certified beds and approximately 102 residents (about 85% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SPRINGFIELD, Missouri.
How Does Maranatha Village, Inc Compare to Other Missouri Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Missouri, MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.5, staff turnover (46%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Maranatha Village, Inc?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Maranatha Village, Inc Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC 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 Maranatha Village, Inc Stick Around?
MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC has a staff turnover rate of 46%, which is about average for Missouri nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Maranatha Village, Inc Ever Fined?
MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC 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 Maranatha Village, Inc on Any Federal Watch List?
MARANATHA VILLAGE, INC 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.