Village Green Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center
23 Fair Street, Bristol, CT 06010 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (860) 589-2923 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $22,411 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-07)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- about 21% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
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.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 20.3% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 10.7% | 6.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.9% | 22.3% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.0% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.0% | 16.4% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.1% | 17.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 84.3% | 93.5% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.3% | 4.0% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.9% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.7% | 17.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 21.8% | 69.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.1% | 24.3% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 19.0% | 10.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.63 | 2.06 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.89 | 1.46 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
51.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 66 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 36 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 42% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 51.9%CMS range 38.5–63.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.4%CMS range 8.7–16.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 50.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 41.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 50.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 0.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.0%CMS range 4.5–11.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 63% occupied, or roughly 45 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.08 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.94 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 is below 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.24 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.05 to 0.68 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
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 clinical record review, observation, facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 7 sampled residents (Resident #124) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure necessary care and services were immediately sought and provided to ensure Resident # 124 safety and prevent a fall with major injury, when Resident # 124 exhibited a change in condition, subsequently fell out of bed and sustained an eyelid laceration and fracture to the face and failed to ensure the area designated for smoking was free from accident hazards. The findings included: 1. Resident #124's diagnoses included a history of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA) with right sided hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis), epilepsy and chronic respiratory failure with tracheostomy (trach). The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #124 was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS of 4, required assistance of one with bed mobility, total assistance of two for transfers and…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-07-08 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed accidents, the facility failed to ensure a resident with dysphagia was provided the correct liquid consistency in accordance with physician orders, resulting in respiratory distress and hospitalization. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included cerebrovascular infarction with hemiplegia and hemiparesis, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and vascular dementia. The RCP dated 5/12/2024 identified Resident #1 was at risk for impaired swallowing related to cerebrovascular accident and dementia. Interventions directed assistance of one staff for all meals, do not leave any liquids unsupervised with resident, and mechanically altered diet as ordered. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as alert and oriented, was dependent for all ADL's, and required a mechanically altered diet. A physician's order dated 5/18/2024…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 and policy, and staff interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #2) reviewed for controlled substances, the facility failed to ensure controlled substances were secured under double lock immediately upon receipt in accordance with facility policy. Specifically, controlled substances delivered by the pharmacy were left unsecured on top of a medication cart and were not verified and secured at the time of receipt, resulting in a discrepancy in which one (1) blister pack of Oxycodone was unaccounted for. The findings include:Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of the right femur.The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had pain or hurting within the last five (5) days and what appeared to relieve the pain included pain medications.The Physician's Orders dated 10/7/25 directed Oxycodone 5 mg tablet every four (4) hours as needed for pain and Lyrica (Pregabalin)…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
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 clinical record review, observation and interviews for 1 of 2 residents ( Resident #26) reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to ensure a resident urinary collecting device was handled in a dignified manner. The findings include: Resident #26 's diagnoses included obstructive and reflux uropathy, unspecified, benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms and history of fall. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #26 was cognitive impaired and required moderate assistance with toileting hygiene, maximal assistance in personal hygiene and toilet transfer. The care plan dated 1/28/25 identified Resident #26 was incontinent of urine. Interventions included utilizing appropriate continent products, monitoring output for odor, color, consistency and amount and completing an incontinent assessment at intervals according to policy and procedure. A physician's order dated 2/13/25 directed to urinary drainage one time per day for Foley management.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 clinical record review, observations, review of facility documents and staff interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #62) reviewed for the Environment, the facility failed to ensure the floor in the resident's room was kept clean and sanitary. The findings include: Resident #62 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a neurological disorder and chronic respiratory failure. The quarterly MDS assessment identified Resident #62 was cognitively intact, had a tracheostomy, and was dependent for Activities of Daily Living (ADL). A care plan dated 9/19/2024 indicated the resident had an enteral feeding tube and a urinary catheter. On 3/9/2025 at 1:49 PM, an interview with Resident #62's family member indicated that housekeeping does not come often and can take several days for someone from housekeeping to disinfect the floor when there is a spill. An observation of the floor with the resident's family member identified a pink stain on the floor by the foot of the bed. Additionally, it was…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #1) reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), failed to ensure the accurate coding of an MDS assessment for a resident identified with a serious mental illness. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder bipolar type. Preadmission Screening and Resident Review Summary of Findings Report dated 12/11/18 identified Resident #1 was determined to meet PASRR assessment requirements for a serious mental illness. The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was coded as '0' meaning s/he did not meet PASRR requirements as having a diagnosis of a serious mental illness was cognitively intact. The care plan dated 11/27/24 identified at risk for complications related to the use of psychotropic drugs. Interventions directed to monitor and report changes to mental status and obtain a psychiatric evaluation as ordered.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 clinical record reviews, observations, review of policy and interviews for 2 of 4 residents ( Resident #224 and #274) reviewed for Respiratory Care, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan to meet the essential needs of the resident. The findings included: 1. Resident #224's diagnoses included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), pneumonia, acute respiratory failure. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #224 was cognitively intact required oxygen therapy, no suctioning and no tracheostomy care. A physician's order dated 1/14/2025 directed to provide Oxygen at 3 liters per minute via a trach mask (a mask that covers and provides oxygen through Resident #224's tracheostomy stoma site located in the neck area) with 28% humidification at bedtime and off in the AM. The care plan dated 1/17/2025 indicated Resident #224 was at risk for Multiple Drug-Resistant Organisms (MDRO) due to having a tracheostomy. An intervention was put in place to…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 clinical record reviews, review of policy and staff interviews for 1 of 1 resident ( Resident # 2) reviewed for elopement, the facility failed to conduct elopement evaluations per facility policy and for 1 of 7 residents ( Resident #124) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was in place for a resident with a history of seizures and for 1 of 4 for residents (Resident # 224) reviewed for Respiratory Care, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan for resident requiring respiratory care was develop. The findings included : 1. Resident #2's diagnosis included dementia with behavioral disturbances. An eMAR-Administration note dated 9/22/2023 at 2:50 PM directed to check the placement of the resident's Wander guard bracelet on the left ankle (a bracelet that alarms if a resident seeks to exit through a door that is equipped to detect the alarm). The documentation further indicated the wander guard was discontinued. An elopement evaluation 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 clinical record reviews, observations, review of facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents( Resident #24) reviewed for pressure ulcers and for the only resident (Resident #38) reviewed for specialized treatment and for the only resident resident ( Resident #324) reviewed for range of motion, the facility failed to revise the resident's care plans. The findings included : 1. Resident #24's diagnosis included type 2 diabetes mellitus and vascular dementia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #24 was moderately cognitively impaired, had no pressure ulcers but was at risk for developing a pressure ulcer. Resident #24's care plan revised dated 3/1/2025 indicated Resident #24 was at risk for skin breakdown due to fragile skin, impaired cognition and impaired sensation. Interventions included in part to float heels as resident tolerates, and to offload or reposition Resident #24 four times per shift. A weekly wound evaluation completed on paper 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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 Resident #24 Pressure Ulcer/Injury F686 Based on clinical record review interviews and facility policy for 1 of 6 Residents reviewed for Pressure ulcer (#24), the facility failed to ensure staff completed weekly skin checks consistently, completed skin risk assessments quarterly or with change of condition and documented notification of the physician and responsible party with a new change in skin status. The findings include: ___________________________ F657 No care plan update with development of the stage 1 heel pressure ulcer. _________________________________ 03/10/25 10:22 AM has an [NAME] on left heel 03/10/25 01:10 PM Observation of the left outer heel with the wound nurse shows intact pink skin left outer heel. tender staff say due to neuropathy, wearing not skid socks no bootie or pressure relief. resident was repositioned by charge and wound nurses. 03/11/25 03:07 PM - MDs quarterly 2/1/2025- no pressure ulcer at risk for pressure ulcer, had a clinical assessment diagnosis- Cerebral infarction, type 2…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 facility policy and interviews for 1 of 4 residents ( Resident # 224) reviewed for Respiratory Care, the facility failed to ensure staff notified the physician with a change of condition and obtained orders for an invasive procedure and failed to maintain an easily accessible, organized emergency equipment area at the resident's bedside. The findings included: Resident #224's diagnoses included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), pneumonia and acute respiratory failure and neoplasm of the larynx. 1. a. A physician's order dated 1/14/2025 directed to provide Oxygen at 3 liters per minute via a trach mask (a mask that covers and provides oxygen through Resident #224's tracheostomy stoma site located in the neck area) with 28% humidification at bedtime and off in the AM. The care plan dated 1/17/2025 indicated Resident #224 was at risk for Multiple Drug-Resistant Organisms (MDRO) due to having a tracheostomy. An intervention directed to maintain Enhanced Barrier…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, facility policy review and interview for 4 of 4 Nurse Aides(NA) ( Nurse Aides #1, # 2 # 3 and # 4), the facility failed to ensure that annual competencies were completed for nurse aide staff for 2023 and 2024. The findings include: Review of a facility employee listing provided to the survey team upon entrance to the facility as part of an annual recertification survey identified NA #3 had a hire date of 10/2/2000, NA #4 had a hire date of 7/3/12, and NA #2 had a hire date of 12/12/23. During a review of annual competencies for facility nurse aide staff for 2023, the facility failed to provide any documentation of annual competencies for 2023 completed for NA #3. Further review of the annual competencies for 2024 failed to identify any competencies for NA #2 and NA #4. Interview with LPN #1 (Infection Control Nurse) on 3/12/25 at 12:00 PM identified the facility did not have a dedicated staff development nurse and the DNS, who was unavailable to speak with during the survey, was responsible for ensuring that all nursing staff completed…
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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of employee files, facility documentation review, and facility policy review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure annual performance evaluations were completed for nurse aide staff for 2023 and 2024. The findings included: Review of a facility employee listing provided to the survey team upon entrance to the facility as part of an annual recertification survey identified NA #3 had a hire date of 10/2/2000, NA #4 had a hire date of 7/3/12, and NA #2 had a hire date of 12/12/23. A review of annual performance evaluations for facility nurse aide staff for 2023, the facility failed to provide any documentation of annual performance evaluations for completed for NA #3 and NA #4. A review of annual performance evaluations for facility nurse aide staff for 2024, the facility failed to provide any documentation of annual performance evaluations for completed for NA #2 and NA #4. Interview with the Director of HR on 3/12/25 at 11:05 AM identified she was responsible for notifying the DNS of the facility when nursing staff had performance evaluations that were due to…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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, observation, facility policy and interviews for the only resident reviewed for skin conditions (Resident #46) and the only resident (Resident #224) reviewed for tube feeding, the facility failed to follow the Enhanced Barrier Precautions guidelines. The findings include: 1. Resident #46's diagnoses included Venous Insufficiency, edema, essential hypertension. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/17/25 identified the resident had a lesion on his/her right dorsal foot. Interventions included weekly skin checks by licensed nurses, and floating heels while in bed. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #46 was cognitively intact and required maximum assistance with showering, toileting, and required moderate assistance with personal hygiene. A physician's order dated 3/9/2025 directed to place resident on enhanced barrier precautions every shift secondary to a wound. A physician's note dated 2/14/25 at 7:56 AM written by Medical Doctor (MD #2)…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 clinical record reviews, observations, review of facility policy and interviews for 2 of 5 ( Residents # 40 and # 325) reviewed for the environment,, the facility did not ensure that residents call bell were within reach. The findings included: 1. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a neurological disorder and dependence on a ventilator. A care plan dated [DATE] indicated Resident #40 was at risk for alteration in comfort related to chronic pain. Interventions included advising the resident to request pain medication before the pain becomes severe. The care plan also indicated the resident had an Advanced Directive to perform Cardio CPR during an emergency. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment, usually understood others. The MDS assessment further indicated the resident required substantial/maximal assistance with mobility and was dependent on personal hygiene and toileting. An observation in…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 clinical record reviews, observations, review of facility documents, review of policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 2 therapeutic modality machines in the Therapy Department had been evaluated annually for safety in 2022 and 2023 and for 1 of 4 residents ( Resident # 8) reviewed for Respiratory Care, the facility failed to ensure signage was on a resident's door to indicate oxygen was in use. The findings included: 1. An observation on 3/11/2025 starting at 2:00PM and ending at 3:15 PM of the Therapy Department that uses the same room and equipment for residents in the facility and for outpatient physical therapy. Further observations identified the therapy modality machines was without stickers to indicated when was the last time the machine had been evaluated for safety. An interview with the Maintenance Director on 3/11/2025 at 3:15 PM indicated she/he could not find stickers on either modality machine of when the last safety evaluation was conducted and indicated she/he would look at…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to complete neurological checks for an unwitnessed fall in full per facility protocol. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included fibromyalgia and repeated falls. A care plan dated 2/4/25 identified Resident #1 was at risk for falls with interventions that included to assist the resident with ambulation and transfers, and if a fall occurs, to initiate frequent neurological and bleeding evaluation per facility protocol. The fall risk evaluation dated 2/5/25 identified Resident #1 scored fifteen (15) indictive of being at risk for falls. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fourteen (14) indicative of intact cognition, required one staff physical assist for toilet use, transfers and bed mobility, and had a fall in…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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, clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #5), reviewed for infection control, the facility failed to implement the required transmission-based precautions as per the facility policy. The findings include: Resident #5 was admitted with chronic respiratory failure dependent on a ventilator, dementia, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), epilepsy (seizure disorder) and extended spectrum beta lactamase resistance (ESBL- presence of a bacteria resistant to common antibiotics). A hospital transfer document dated 5/13/2024 identified Resident #5 had a chronic methicillin (antibiotic) resistive staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)(bacteria) infection in his/her tracheostomy site. A physician's order dated 12/22/2024 directed contact precautions until further notice for positive MRSA, ESBL. A quarterly minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 had severely impaired cognition (BIMS of 6) and required…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-20 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of seven residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record was complete and accurate to include wound care documentation, and for two of seven residents (Resident #5 and #6) reviewed for quality of care, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record was complete and accurate to include resident care. The findings include: 1. Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, and cerebral infarction with hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis and weakness). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was unable to perform a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicative of severely impaired cognition and was dependent with all ADL's (activities of daily living). The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/2/2024 identified a risk for skin breakdown related to decreased activity, fail skin, history of pressure ulcer,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 clinical record review, observations, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #6) reviewed for wound care treatment, the facility failed to ensure wound care was provided in accordance with accepted infection control practices. The findings include: Resident #6's diagnoses included chronic kidney disease and heart failure. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #6 had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for ADLs. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/10/2024 identified resident was at risk for skin breakdown related to immobility or has actual skin breakdown and had contractures. Interventions directed to monitor skin. A physician order dated 11/8/2024 directed to cleanse an open blister on the back of the left calf and right calf with wound wash, apply xeroform and foam dressing change daily and as needed. Continuous observation of Resident #6's wound care on 11/20/2024…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-24 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 one (1) of three (3)residents reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the State Agency was notified timely of allegations of abuse. Resident #1's diagnoses included generalized muscle weakness and major depressive disorder. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact, exhibited no behaviors and required substantial assistance with bed mobility, was dependent on staff for transfers and toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/16/24 identified that Resident #1 required assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) with interventions that included to provide an assist of one with ADLs, monitor for complications of immobility and to utilize bed rails as an enabler. Review of the Reportable Event dated 9/6/24 at 12:00 AM identified that outside vendor, Person #3 stated that Person #2 was told by Resident #1 that profanity was…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-24 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 one (1) of three (3)residents reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to investigate allegations of abuse. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included generalized muscle weakness and major depressive disorder. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact, exhibited no behaviors and required substantial assistance with bed mobility, was dependent on staff for transfers and toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/16/24 identified that Resident #1 required assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Interventions included to provide an assist of one with ADLs, monitor for complications of immobility and bed rails to be used as an enabler. Interview with Person #1 on 9/24/24 at 9:43 AM identified that he/she received a call from Person #2 on 9/3/24 stating that Resident #1 reported being thrown like a rag doll and was sworn…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for behaviors, the facility failed to revise the care plan indicating refusals of personal care. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included generalized muscle weakness and major depressive disorder. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact, exhibited no behaviors and required substantial assistance with bed mobility, was dependent on staff for transfers and toileting hygiene. Review of the Point of Care (POC) NA documentation on September 24, 2024 identified that there was no documentation on bathing for Resident #1 on the 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM shift since 9/2/24 and no documentation on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift since 9/13/24. Interview with NA #1 on 9/24/24 at 11:23 AM identified that she often cares for Resident #1 and that he/she is incontinent of both bladder and bowel often but will refuse care…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-21 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for two of three residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed ensure the resident was free from mistreatment. The findings include: 1. Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included dementia and adjustment disorder with anxiety. A Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 1/17/2024 identified Resident #1 had wandering behaviors, had a potential to exhibit physical behaviors related to cognitive loss and violent tendencies prior to admission. The RCP directed to monitor physical behaviors, explain all care one step at a time if resident becomes combative/postpone care and to redirect away from doorways or exits. An admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, was independent for transfers and walking. A facility psychiatric evaluation and consultation dated 1/19/2024 identified Resident #1 was oriented to self, was confused, and the confusion…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 facility policy, facility documentation and interview for 1 resident (Resident #63) reviewed for the environment, the facility failed to ensure resident's wheelchair was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner and for 2 of 3 units, the facility failed to maintain a clean, sanitary, comfortable and homelike environment. The findings include: 1. Resident #63's diagnoses included schizophrenia, heart failure and depression. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #63 had intact cognition and required supervision with locomotion on and off unit, was independent with ambulation and used a walker and wheelchair for mobility. Observation of Resident #63's wheelchair on 2/22/23 at 9:40 AM with the Account Manager (Housekeeping) and the District Manager of Healthcare Services Group, (the facility's contracted housekeeping company), identified a thick coating of dust and debris on both foot rests and the metal wheelchair frame. Interview with the Account Manager (Housekeeping)…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
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 4 of 4 residents (Resident #12, 41, 62 and 63) reviewed for smoking, the facility failed to ensure that smoking assessments were completed timely. The findings include: 1. Resident #12 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Schizophrenia, COPD, and nicotine dependence. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #12 had intact cognition. The care plan dated 2/1/23 identified that Resident #12 may smoke with supervision per the smoking assessment. Interventions included to educate the resident/health care decision maker on the facility's smoking policy and to supervise the resident with smoking in accordance with assessed needs. A physician's order dated 2/1/23 directed that Resident #12 required set up and assistance for all ADL tasks. Review of clinical record failed to reflect that smoking assessments had been completed quarterly after 7/27/22 (7 months ago). Further, the clinical record…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-01 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews, the facility failed to complete nursing competencies related to IV and respiratory therapy. The findings include: 1. Although requested, the DNS did not provide IV Therapy nurse and nurse aide competencies for 2022. Interview with the DNS on 2/23/23 at 10:24 AM indicated she was responsible to make sure IV Therapy nurse and nurse aide competencies were completed annually and she indicated they had not been done since 2021. Review of the Intravenous Infusion Therapy Manual identified the purpose was to provide comprehensive and integrated infusion care to patients. The facility administrator is responsible for staffing qualified nurses to care for patients' infusion therapy. It is the responsibility of the individual nurse to comply with state nurse act and state regulatory agencies. 2. Facility documentation identified 22 residents had a tracheostomy and 15 residents were on a mechanical ventilator. Interview with Administrator and DNS on 3/1/23 at 9:10 AM identified the mandatory respiratory education is…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-01 · tag F0849 — patternArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
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 clinical record review, facility policy, facility contractual agreement, and interviews for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for hospice, the facility failed to ensure care was coordinated between the contracted hospice provider and the facility. The findings include: Resident #9 was admitted to the facility, with diagnoses that included alcohol use disorder, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and atherosclerotic heart disease. A physician's order dated 3/9/2021 directed Resident #9 to have a hospice consult. Review of the hospice physician certification dated 3/10/2021 identified Resident #9 was certified for hospice care due to a terminal diagnosis of senile degeneration of the brain. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #9 had intact cognition, required an assist of 1 for eating and toileting. Additionally, Resident #9 was receiving hospice care. The facility Resident Care Plan dated 12/19/2022 identified Resident #9 was receiving services with a contracted…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 policy and interview for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #3 and 239) the facility failed to store personal toiletries according to infection control standards, and the facility failed to review the policy and procedure manual annually, and failed to ensure the environmental rounds for infection control were conducted per facility policy. The findings include: 1. Resident #3's diagnoses included diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and dementia. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 was moderately cognitively impaired and required supervision with toilet use, was independent with ambulation and used a walker for mobility. Resident #3 was always continent of urine and had frequent bowel incontinence. Resident #239's diagnoses included heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and anxiety. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #239 had intact cognition, required extensive 2-person assistance with bed mobility, transfers and…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-01 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility documentation, facility policy and interviews the facility failed to track infections per the facility policy. The findings include: Review of the October, November, and December 2022 antibiotic stewardship line lists failed to identify if the infections were community or facility acquired and failed to identify if the resident had met the criteria for an infection. Interview with the Infection Preventionist, (LPN #3) on 2/23/22 at 10:30 AM indicated she uses the McGeers Criteria (infection surveillance definitions to provide standardized guidance for infection surveillance activities) to look at infections and antibiotic use but does not add that documentation to the monthly infection line list. In review of the October, November, and December 2022 line lists, LPN #3 was not able to identify which resident's had symptoms of infection, what symptoms they had, and if the resident had met the McGeers Criteria. LPN #3 indicated she tracks residents that were prescribed antibiotics. LPN #3 noted she does not monitor or investigate residents based on infection symptoms…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-01 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 5 of 5 residents (Resident #33, 49, 54, 55, and 66) reviewed for vaccines, the facility failed to ensure the resident and/or resident representative were educated about and offered the Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccines. The findings include: 1. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease and dementia. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #33 had severely impaired cognition and was not offered and did not receive the Pneumococcal Vaccine. The Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccine Informed Consent Forms in the record were blank. Interview and review of the clinical record with LPN #3 and the DNS on 2/23/23 at 11:40 AM indicated in Resident #33's chart had blank Influenza and Pneumococcal consents forms. The DNS noted that in the electronic medical record, only the Covid vaccine was documented as given. 2. Resident #49 was admitted to…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 interview for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #54) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to implement behavior monitoring interventions according to the care plan for a resident on a psychotropic medication. The findings include: Resident #54's diagnoses included depression, and unspecified dementia and Parkinson's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #54 was moderately cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance with dressing, personal hygiene, toileting, and limited assistance with eating. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/16/23 identified Resident #54 was at risk for complications related to the use of psychotropic drugs. Interventions directed to complete a behavior monitoring flow sheet. A physician's order dated 2/22/23 directed to administer duloxetine HCl 20 mg daily, and mirtazapine 15mg at bedtime to be given to Resident #54. Review of the Physicians orders and…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 #79) reviewed for enteral feeding, the facility failed to ensure the resident's feeding system was labeled according to the policy. The findings include: Resident #79 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included anoxic brain damage and chronic respiratory failure. A physician's order dated 2/10/23 directed to administer enteral feeding every shift Jevity 1.2 at 55 ml per hour continuous (until Jevity 1.5 is available). The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #79 had severely impaired cognition and was totally dependent for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, eating, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Additionally, Resident #79 required a feeding tube providing more than 51% of total calories per day. The care plan dated 2/13/23 identified Resident #79 was at nutritional risk related to enteral feeding for nutrition support. Interventions included to give tube…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-01 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 of 7 residents (Resident #49) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the medications were administered via feeding tube per facility policy and gastric residuals were checked prior to medication administration. The findings include: Resident #49 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included gastrostomy and tracheostomy. The care plan dated 12/15/22 identified a nutritional risk with interventions that included to provide tube feeding and flushes as ordered. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #49 had severely impaired cognition and required a feeding tube that provided more than 51% of total calories per day. A physician's order dated 1/9/23 directed to give liquid protein 30 ml daily, Baclofen 5mg every 8 hours, Lorazepam 0.5mg every 8 hours, Insulin Glargine 25 units subcutaneously daily, and Enoxaparin 40 mg intramuscular 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.
- No harm found · B2023-03-01 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
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 resident (Resident #32) reviewed for hospitalization, and for all residents transferred to the hospital between 12/7/21 - 2/2/23 (14 months), the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman when the residents were transferred to and/or admitted to the hospital. The findings include: Resident #32's diagnoses included respiratory failure and diabetes. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #32 had intact cognition. The physician's note dated 12/5/22 identified Resident #32 was admitted to the hospital from [DATE] - 12/5/22 due to low oxygen levels associated with acute on chronic respiratory failure. Interview with SW #1 and the Business Office Manager on 3/1/23 at 10:45 AM SW #1 indicated that the Business Office Manager was responsible to send the notifications of hospital transfers to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. SW #1 and the Business Office Manager…
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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-03-01 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 3 of 4 residents (Resident #41, 62 and 63) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that the MDS reflected an accurate history of tobacco use. The findings include: 1. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke, diabetes, and PTSD. The care plan dated 12/21/22 identified Resident #41 may smoke independently per smoking assessment. Interventions included to educate the resident/health care decision maker on the facility's smoking policy and to supervise the resident with smoking in accordance with assessed needs. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] failed to identify Resident #41's current tobacco use. 2. Resident # 62 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included alcohol dependence, asthma and nicotine use. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #62 no history of current tobacco use. The care plan dated 12/19/22 identified that…
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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2021-07-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 facility's cleaning policy and interviews for 2 of 11 bathrooms/ toilets observed for cleanliness, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary/clean environment. The findings include: During a tour of the facility on 6/28/21 at 9:20 AM the bathroom toilet seat in room [ROOM NUMBER] was noted to be visibly soiled with dried brown debris on the interior and exterior of the seat. Additionally, a commode in room [ROOM NUMBER] was noted to be positioned at the resident's bed side and was soiled with dried brown debris on the interior and exterior of the seat. Upon further observation on 6/29/21 at 10:00 AM, the toilet seat in room [ROOM NUMBER] and the commode in room [ROOM NUMBER] were noted with dried brown debris on the interior and exterior of the seat. Interview and walk through observation of both areas on 6/29/21 at 2:34 PM with the Director of Housekeeping noted that the toilet in room [ROOM NUMBER] had been cleaned but the commode in room [ROOM NUMBER] remained soiled.…
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.
- No harm found · B2021-07-02 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 clinical record review, review of facility policy and interview for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #30 and Resident #46) reviewed for hospitalizations, the facility failed to provide a written notice of the bed-hold policy to the resident and the resident's representative. The findings include: 1. Resident #30's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension and anxiety. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #30 had a short/long term memory problem but was independent with decision making. Additionally, Resident #30 required total assistance of 2 with bathing and transfers and extensive assistance of 2 with bed mobility, dressing, grooming and toilet use. A nurse's note dated 4/27/21 identified Resident #30 was unresponsive to all stimuli, had not voided and was unable to take anything by mouth. The Advanced Practice Registered Nurse was updated and directed to transfer Resident #30 to the Emergency Room. Nurse's notes dated 4/27/21 at 4:39 PM…
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.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$22,411 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $14,393 — penalty dated 2025-03-07
- $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-07-08
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ATLAS HEALTHCARE — 29 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 4.4 | -2.4 vs chain |
The other 28 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BRISTOL SNF OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/27/2025 |
| HB BRISTOL HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 02/27/2025 |
| LS BRISTOL HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 02/27/2025 |
| SG BRISTOL HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 02/27/2025 |
| HIRSCH, HADASSA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 02/27/2025 |
| SONNENSCHEIN, LEAH | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 02/27/2025 |
| TAUBER, SHAINDY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 02/27/2025 |
| GOTTLIEB, MOSHE | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| BAK, PINCHOS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| BRISTOL OPCO MANAGER LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| BAUER, SHANNON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| SHAHEN, JANET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| YEBOAH, BENJAMIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| BRISTOL SNF REALTY HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| BRISTOL SNF REALTY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/15/2025 |
| JMH FAMILY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| JMH FAMILY TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| MLS FAMILY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| MLS FAMILY TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| SGS FAMILY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
| SGS FAMILY TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/27/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 32 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
13 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.
This home reported $2.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Connecticut Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 075198. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.