Seabury

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

71.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 168 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 78 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.56 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 86% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 72 beds and averages 67.7 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.78 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.19 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.10 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.32 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.96 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.35 to 0.79 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 10% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation in the Dietary Department, staff interview, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and dated, and failed to ensure an adequately clean water filter system for the steam receptacles. The findings include: During a tour of the Dietary Department on 3/15/24 at 10:38 AM with the Executive Chef the following was identified: a. A 40-gallon plastic bin containing loose sugar (approximately 1/4 full) failed to identify the date the sugar was poured into the bin and failed to identify the expiration date of the sugar. b. A 40-gallon plastic bin containing loose rice flour (approximately 1/3 full) failed to identify the date the rice flour was poured into the bin and failed to identify the expiration date of the rice flour. c. A 40-gallon plastic bin containing loose brown rice was (approximately 1/16 full) failed to identify the date the brown rice was poured into the bin and failed to identify the expiration date of the brown rice. d. A 40-gallon plastic bin of approximately 2 cups of loose flour failed to identify the date the flour…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-03-21 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #7) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure a weekly skin check was conducted by a licensed staff member and for 1 of 5 sampled residents, (Resident #48) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to follow physician orders regarding pain medications. The findings include: 1. Resident #7 had a diagnosis of cerebral infarction with paralysis, hypertension, and congestive heart failure. Review of the physician orders dated 8/14/23 directed Resident #7 to have skin assessments performed weekly on Mondays. The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 was without cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for transfers and personal hygiene, and required maximal assistance from staff for bathing, and toileting. Resident #7's Resident Care Plan dated 1/26/24 identified Resident #7 was at risk for pressure ulcers/injury related…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #28) reviewed for advanced directives, the facility failed to have a signed advanced directive available in either the paper or electronic clinical record. The findings include: Resident #28's diagnoses included congestive heart failure and chronic kidney disease. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #28 was severely cognitively impaired and required moderate assistance for bed mobility and transfers. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/11/24 identified that Resident #28 was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and a Do Not Hospitalize (DNH). Review of the monthly physician's orders for January, February, and March 2024 failed to identify a current or discontinued order for a DNR or DNH. In an interview and clinical record review with the DNS and ADNS on 3/20/24 at 9:21 AM, Resident #28's clinical record failed to reflect a completed and signed advanced directive form and failed…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #14) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to notify the provider of a significant change in the resident's weight. The findings include: Resident #14's diagnoses included heart failure, anemia, and atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was moderately cognitively impaired, required substantial/maximal assistance of staff to transfer, and required substantial/maximal assistance of staff to propel the wheelchair. The Resident Care Plan dated 11/5/23 identified that Resident #14 had heart failure and was at risk of having too much fluid in his/her circulatory system. Interventions included notifying the medical staff if the resident had any signs or symptoms of heart failure and updating the medical staff of any significant changes in the resident's condition. A physician's order dated…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #14) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to follow the provider's order for daily weights, and for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #18) reviewed for skin conditions the facility failed to ensure a treatment order was correctly transcribed to the [NAME] and that post-surgical wound treatments were performed. The findings include: 1. Resident #14's diagnoses included heart failure, anemia, and atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was moderately cognitively impaired, required substantial/maximal assistance of staff to transfer, and required substantial/maximal assistance of staff to propel the wheelchair. The Resident Care Plan dated 11/5/23 identified that Resident #14 had heart failure and was at risk of having too much fluid in his/her circulatory system. Interventions included…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents, (Resident #7), reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure that a weekly skin assessment was completed by a licensed staff member. The findings included: Resident #7's diagnosis included hypertension, congestive heart failure, and hemiplegia/ hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction affecting the left side. Review of the physician orders dated 8/14/23 directed Resident #7 to have weekly skin checks completed on Mondays during the day shift. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 was cognitively intact, was dependent on staff for transfers, required set up for eating, and personal hygiene, and required maximal assistance for bathing, and toileting. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/26/24 identified Resident #7 was at risk for pressure ulcers/injury related to the use of a splint (medical device) to left upper extremity, skin integrity was to be…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #10 and #215) reviewed for respiratory issues, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for oxygen administration. The findings include: 1. Resident #10's diagnosis included malignant neoplasm of the frontal lobe, atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), and congestive heart failure. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #10 was severely cognitively impaired and was totally dependent on staff for toileting and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/28/24 identified Resident #10 utilized oxygen with interventions that included regularly monitoring his/her oxygen saturation levels and application of oxygen via nasal cannula as needed. Review of the nursing note dated 3/7/24 at 7:21 AM identified that at 12:30 AM Resident #10 had a low oxygen saturation level on room air (without oxygen) ranging between 85 percent (%) to 87 %, oxygen…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0710 — isolated
  Obtain a doctor's order to admit a resident and ensure the resident is under a doctor's care.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #28) reviewed for hospice, the facility administered hospice services without a physician's order. The findings include: Resident #28's was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included congestive heart failure and chronic kidney disease. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #28 was severely cognitively impaired and required moderate assistance for bed mobility and transfers. Additionally, the MDS identified that Resident #28 received hospice care. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/11/24 identified that Resident #28 was on hospice care. Interventions included performing a pain assessment every shift, administering comfort meds as ordered and assessing the response, and education on the progression of terminal illness and symptoms during the dying process. Review of the monthly physician's orders dated January, February, and March 2024 failed…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
  Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 5 sampled residents, (Resident #18), reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to obtain lab services per the physician order. The findings include: Resident #18's diagnoses included bipolar disorder, hypertension, dementia, and hypothyroidism. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #18 required set-up or clean up assistance with eating and oral hygiene, and supervision or touching assistance with upper body dressing and personal hygiene. The physician orders dated 1/18/24 directed facility staff to obtain laboratory work which included a complete blood count, basic metabolic panel, thyroid stimulating hormone, and vitamin D12 levels. Review of the clinical record failed to identify Resident #18 had laboratory results available per the physician's order on 1/18/24. Interview with the DNS on 03/21/24 at 11:56 AM identified that the facility staff failed to have the physician…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-02-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #309) reviewed for admission/transfer/discharge, the facility failed to perform a full body skin assessment on admission, and to ensure pain medications were readily available to meet the resident's needs on admission. The findings include: Resident #309 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included joint replacement surgery, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, anemia, and atherosclerotic heart disease. The care plan dated 1/20/22 for identified Resident #309 was at risk for pressure ulcers and skin injuries related to impaired mobility, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus and aspirin use. Resident #309 is identified to have pain related to total knee replacement, history of lumbar radiculopathy, cervical myelopathy, and osteoarthritis. Interventions included to monitor for changes in CMS to lower extremities, check feet daily,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$28,105 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $28,105 — penalty dated 2025-12-18

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in CT