Apple Rehab Cromwell
156 Berlin Road, Cromwell, CT 06416 · For profit - Corporation · 85 certified beds · (860) 635-1010 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $27,991 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-06)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 improved from 1 to 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 | 24.5% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 6.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.4% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.3% | 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 | 3.1% | 3.5% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 27.3% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.7% | 17.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.5% | 93.5% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.1% | 4.0% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.9% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.3% | 17.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 52.3% | 69.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.1% | 24.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.4% | 10.7% | 12.0% | typical |
‡ 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.
55.9% 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 92 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 40.9% 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 22 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 55.9%CMS range 47.2–64.8 | 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 | 11.0%CMS range 7.1–15.1 | 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 | 40.9% | 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 | 31.8% | 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 | 97.2% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 5.6% | 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 3.9–13.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.91 | 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 85 beds and averages 67.1 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 18 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.51 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.77 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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.
40 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-01-06 · 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 reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and incontinent care, the facility failed to follow the physician's orders for two (2) staff to assist the resident when being turned from side to side during care which resulted in a fall off the bed and the resident sustaining a laceration to the head. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting the right side after a stroke, atrial fibrillation, morbid obesity, aphasia, and anxiety. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating Resident #1 rarely or never made decisions, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, required maximum assistance for turning and repositioning when in bed, was incontinent of bowel and bladder, and received an…
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 · Gcited before2024-04-09 · 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 observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy, and interview for the only sampled resident (Resident #71) reviewed for a death record, the facility failed to ensure that liquids were not accessible to a resident who was on aspiration (choking) precautions. The findings include: Resident #71's diagnoses included cerebrovascular accident (stroke) with left sided paralysis, Barrett's esophagus (narrowed esophagus), and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #71 was cognitively impaired, dependent on staff for eating, and required the assistance of 2 staff for bed mobility and transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/29/23 identified Resident #71 was at risk for aspiration (food or fluids going into the lungs) with interventions that included assisting with feeding, watching for signs/symptoms of aspiration, alternating solids and liquids, encouraging small sips of fluid and small bites of food, encouraging the resident…
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 before2026-05-13 · 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 record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for wounds, the facility failed to ensure the State Agency was notified timely after the facility was notified of a threat of harm to a resident. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included diabetes, autism, and acquired absence of right toes. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3), indicative of severe cognitive impairment, and was independent for transfers and mobility. A resident care plan (RCP) dated 1/28/2026 identified a risk for skin issues due to picking and scratching and can be verbally and/or physically aggressive. Interventions directed family members (Person #1) liked to keep door closed (when visiting) to decrease distractions and noise. Record review identified Person #1, Person #2 and Person #4 were co-conservators…
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 before2026-05-13 · 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 observation, clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for wounds, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation was completed for an allegation of abuse as per facility policy. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included diabetes, autism, and acquired absence of right toes. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3), indicative of severe cognitive impairment, and was independent for transfers and mobility. A resident care plan (RCP) dated 1/28/2026 identified a risk for skin issues due to picking and scratching and can be verbally and/or physically aggressive. Interventions directed family members (Person #1) liked to keep door closed (when visiting) to decrease distractions and noise. Record review identified Person #1, Person #2 and Person #4 were…
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 · D2026-05-13 · 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 three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for wounds, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record was complete and accurate to include documentation of a threat of harm to a resident. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included diabetes, autism, and acquired absence of right toes. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3), indicative of severe cognitive impairment, and was independent for transfers and mobility. A resident care plan (RCP) dated 1/28/2026 identified a risk for skin issues due to picking and scratching and can be verbally and/or physically aggressive. Interventions directed family members (Person #1) liked to keep door closed (when visiting) to decrease distractions and noise. Record review identified Person #1, Person #2 and Person #4 were…
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 before2025-12-04 · 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 observations, interviews, review of clinical records, facility documentation, and facility policy for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #11, #48, and #71) reviewed for infection control practices, the facility failed to ensure appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was worn, and during a review of the water management plan, failed to follow consultant recommendations following positive Legionella testing. The findings include: 1. Resident #11's diagnosis included moderate dementia with mood disturbance, weakness, and pressure ulcer of sacral region stage 3. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #11 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severe cognitive impairment, and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transferring to or from bed, chair, wheelchair, eating, toileting and personal hygiene. Additionally, Resident #11 was actively being treated for a stage 3 pressure ulcer to his/her sacral region (base of the…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 interviews, clinical record review, and facility policy for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #2) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL), the facility failed to accommodate a resident's choice for bathing. The findings include: Resident #2's diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, chronic atrial fibrillation, and hypotension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance for toilet use and bed mobility, and was dependent on staff for transfers.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/20/25 identified Resident #2 needed assistance with ADLs. Interventions included assisting with set up at the bedside or in the bathroom and assisting with tasks he/she was unable to perform.Interview with Resident #2 on 12/1/25 at 10:43 AM identified that although he/she received bed baths, a morning shower was preferred, and it had been a long time since…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #8), reviewed for the environment, the facility failed to notify the physician when a physician order directing the use of a bed cradle could not be implemented. The findings include: Resident #8's diagnoses included dementia, peripheral vascular disease, and purpura (spontaneous capillary rupture).A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #8 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 indicating severely impaired cognition, was dependent with chair/bed to chair transfers, required maximal assistance with rolling left and right, and was at risk for developing pressure injuries.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 9/26/25 identified Resident #8 was at risk for skin breakdown and skin tears. Interventions included gentle handling during all transfers and care procedures, inspecting skin when providing care, and offloading heels while in bed.A physician order dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for 1 of 3 sampled residents, (Resident #52) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to suspend the accused staff member according to their abuse policy. The findings include: Resident #52's diagnoses included Multiple Sclerosis (MS), depression, anxiety, age-related osteoporosis, and hereditary and idiopathic neuropathy. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #52 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating intact cognition, required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and upper body dressing, and was fully dependent on staff for transfers, lower body dressing, and toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect from 4/21/25 through 12/2/25 identified Resident #52 had a fracture of the right tibia (shin) subsequent to a fall and was at a risk for falls due to paraplegia. Interventions included the assistance of 2 with a mechanical…
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 before2025-12-04 · 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 interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for 1 of 3 residents, (Resident #52) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the State Agency. The findings include: Resident #52's diagnoses included Multiple Sclerosis (MS), depression, anxiety, age-related osteoporosis, and hereditary and idiopathic neuropathy. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #52 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating intact cognition, required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and upper body dressing, and was fully dependent on staff for transfers, lower body dressing, and toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect from 4/21/25 through 12/2/25 identified Resident #52 had a fracture of the right tibia (shin) subsequent to a fall and was at a risk for falls due to paraplegia. Interventions included the assistance of 2 with a mechanical lift for all transfers. An…
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 before2025-12-04 · 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 observation, interviews, review of clinical records, facility documentation, and facility policy for 1 of 3 residents, (Resident #52) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to conduct an investigation per the abuse policy. The findings include:Resident #52's diagnoses included Multiple Sclerosis (MS), depression, anxiety, age-related osteoporosis, and hereditary and idiopathic neuropathy. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #52 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating intact cognition, required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and upper body dressing, and was fully dependent on staff for transfers, lower body dressing, and toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect from 4/21/25 through 12/2/25 identified Resident #52 had a fracture of the right tibia (shin) subsequent to a fall and was at a risk for falls due to paraplegia. Interventions included the assistance of 2 with a mechanical lift for all…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review and policy review for the only sampled resident (Resident # 7), reviewed for pain, the facility failed to transcribe and implement new physician's orders for medications. The findings include:Resident #7's diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, insomnia, and anxiety.The admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition, was independent with eating, and required partial/moderate assistance with dressing and toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/25/25 identified Resident #7 had a positive Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), (a federal requirement ensuring people with serious mental illness aren't inappropriately placed in a nursing home). Interventions included a minimum of a yearly comprehensive psychiatric evaluation to clarify the current psychiatric diagnosis and appropriate treatment, and the ongoing evaluation for the…
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 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · 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 observations, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #5) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to obtain and document orthostatic (positional) blood pressures per the physician's order, failed to ensure the resident's condition was documented for 72 hours following a fall per the facility practice, and for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #44) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to set an alternating pressure mattress at the correct setting, per the physician order and Resident Care Plan. The findings include. The findings include: 1.Resident #5's diagnosis included fracture of the neck of the femur with subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing (hip fracture). The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #5 was cognitively intact and had no history of falls. The Resident Care Plan dated 6/17/25 indicated Resident #5 was at risk for falls due to psychotropic…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids 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 review of the clinical record, interviews, and facility policy for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #12 and Resident #38) reviewed for Intravenous (IV) therapy, the facility failed to ensure staff obtained physician orders for routine care and maintenance of peripherally inserted IV sites and failed to consistently document observations of the IV site and the presence or absence of adverse reactions per the facility policy. The findings include. 1. Resident #12's diagnosis included chronic renal disease and urinary tract infection.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicted Resident #12 had moderate cognitive impairment.A physician order dated 11/13/25 directed to provide Dextrose-Sodium chloride Intravenous Solution 5-0.45% 75 milliliters per hour (ml/hr.) every shift for fever/hydration for 3 days for a total of 3 liters.The Resident Care Plan dated 11/14/25 indicated Resident #12 was receiving IV hydration via a peripherally inserted catheter in the left upper extremity due to fever,…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such 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 interviews, and record and policy reviews for the only sampled resident (Resident # 7) reviewed for pain, the facility failed to review the clinical record to ensure appropriate management of pain. The findings include:Resident #7's diagnoses included displaced fracture of the right femur, polyneuropathy, and anxiety.The admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #7 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition, was independent with eating, required partial/moderate assistance with dressing and toileting hygiene, and received scheduled and as needed pain medications. The Pain Assessment interview identified Resident #7 had pain or was hurting frequently in the 5 days prior to the assessment, the pain frequently made it hard to sleep at night, and he/she frequently limited day to day activities due to pain.The Resident Care Plan dated 10/25/25 identified Resident #7 was at risk for pain/discomfort related to a hip fracture.…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 interviews, review of the clinical record and facility policy, for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #5 and Resident #54) reviewed for unnecessary medications, for Resident #5 the facility failed to ensure a Monthly Medication Regimen review was completed, and for Resident #54, the facility failed to ensure a timely response to a pharmacist recommendation. The findings include:1.Resident #5's diagnosis included Parkinson's disease, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder and epilepsy. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #5 had mild cognitive impairment and was receiving antipsychotic, antidepressant, anticoagulant and anticonvulsant medications. The Resident Care Plan dated 9/30/25 identified Resident #5 was at risk for seizures, changes in mood and behavior, and at risk for potential adverse effects from the use of psychotropic medications and anticoagulation therapy. Interventions included evaluating the effectiveness, side effects, and results of…
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 before2025-12-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, facility policy, and interviews during a review of medication storage and labeling, for 1 of 2 medication rooms observed, the facility failed to ensure that expired medications were discarded, failed to ensure medications were labeled appropriately, and failed to ensure medications requiring refrigeration for 5 residents (Resident #3, 10, 14, 39 and 55) were stored at the appropriate temperature. The findings include:1.Observation of the North Wing medication storage room on 12/3/25 at 11:58 AM identified the following: One bottle of Gastrografin incorrectly labeled (the bottle had a partial name tag; however, the residents name was torn off). One Normal saline flush with an expiration date of 8/13/24. Four Heparin Lock Flushes, 50 unit/5ml expired on 3/31/24. One IV Start kit and one IV clamp that expired 4/3/23. Ice buildup was noted in the refrigerator. A temperature log dated 12/1/25 identified a medication refrigerator temperature of 22.1 degrees F (normal to 46 degrees Fahrenheit (F). A temperature log dated 12/2/25 identified a medication refrigerator…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, review of the clinical record and facility policy for the only sampled resident, (Resident #6), reviewed for dental services, the facility failed to assist with obtaining routine dental services upon request. The findings include:Resident #6's diagnoses included Turner's syndrome, type 2 diabetes, and gastroparesis.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #6 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment, required touching assistance with chair/bed-to-chair transfers, required set-up assistance with oral hygiene, and had a problem with vomiting.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect from 9/22/25 through 12/3/25 identified Resident #6 had gastroparesis but failed to include an oral intervention for vomiting due to gastroparesis, failed to include the risk for tooth erosion from stomach acids, and failed to identify that Resident #6 was at risk for various dental issues related to his/her…
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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, facility documentation and policy review, the facility failed to develop, monitor and implement an effective Quality Assurance Performance Improvement plan. The findings include:Review of the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting minutes dated 1/22/25, 4/23/25, and 7/23/25 identified quality measures were reviewed without the benefit of any identified plan, education, or audits to ensure compliance. Additional review of QAPI documentation failed to identify an annual performance improvement plan.Interview and review of the facility QAPI/Performance improvement information with the Director of Nursing (DNS) on 12/4/25 at 11:35 AM identified she was in charge of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement program in the facility. She stated that the policy directed the facility to identify areas of concern and take actions to improve those areas. Review of the quarterly meetings with the DNS identified that formal meetings were held quarterly, but the only quarter that included a QAPI was dated 10/29/25 and was based on a family suggestion…
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 before2024-04-09 · 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, interviews, and facility policy for Resident #22 and Resident #65, the facility failed to follow infection control practices on 1 of 3 units to provide a clean environment, by improperly storing disposable medical equipment. During a tour of the laundry area, the facility failed to ensure a clean environment for laundry and for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to use appropriate hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing wound care. The findings include: 1. Resident #22's diagnoses included a right femur fracture, history of falling, and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #22 was cognitively intact and required moderate assistance with bed mobility and was dependent with transfers and toileting. 2. Resident #65's diagnoses included a right tibia fracture, history of falls, and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #65…
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 before2024-04-09 · 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 observations, clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #39) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a dignified dining experience. The findings include: Resident #39's diagnoses included vascular dementia, history of stroke, and hypertension. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #39 had severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required a mechanically altered diet with set up with meals. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/26/24 identified Resident #39 was at risk for aspiration due to difficulty swallowing. Interventions included to provide 1 to 1 supervision with eating and to follow up with speech pathology (SLP) for safe swallowing techniques. The physician's order dated 5/23/24 identified Resident #39 directed a dysphagia advanced Level 3 texture diet order in place with supervision at mealtime to include cueing for small bites and slow rate. Further review of…
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 · D2024-04-09 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 3 of 24 residents (Resident #69, Resident #474, and Resident #572) reviewed for Advance Directives, the facility failed to obtain Advance Directives upon admission and failed to ensure the resident's preference was honored according to the physician order. The findings include: 1. Resident #69's diagnoses included emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and urinary tract infection. Review of the written Advance Directive Form dated [DATE] and signed by Resident #69 and LPN #3 directed a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status. The form lacked the physician's signature. A physician's order dated [DATE] directed facility staff to perform Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) in the event of a change in status (a discrepancy with the written Advance Directive Form which indicated DNR). The Resident Care Plan dated [DATE] indicated Advanced directives per resident/representative and per the physician orders. A Nurse Practitioner Note 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 before2024-04-09 · 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 staff interviews, record review, review of facility documentation and facility policy for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #13) reviewed for mistreatment, the facility failed to ensure Resident #13 was not treated in a scolding manner. The findings include: Resident #13's diagnoses include adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, unspecified dementia and anxiety disorder. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 was moderately cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of 2 persons with transfers and toileting. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 2/1/24 identified Resident #13 had a problem with determining what was real and what was not, which had proven to hinder some of his/her interactions with peers. Interventions included offering gentle reminders of reality awareness regarding time, place and surroundings. On 4/1/24 at 3:00 PM during the Resident Council meeting, Resident #13 identified that he/she had reported an incident…
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 before2024-04-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 staff interviews, record review, review of facility documentation and facility policy for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #13) reviewed for mistreatment, the facility failed to prevent a Nurse Aide (NA #3) from working during an investigation of mistreatment. The findings include: Resident #13's diagnoses include adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, unspecified dementia and anxiety disorder. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 was moderately cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of 2 persons with transfers and toileting. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 2/1/24 identified Resident #13 had a problem with determining what was real and what was not, which had proven to hinder some of his/her interactions with peers. Interventions included offering gentle reminders of reality awareness regarding time, place and surroundings. On 4/1/24 at 3:00 PM during the Resident Council meeting, Resident #13 identified that he/she…
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 before2024-04-09 · 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 2 of 4 residents (Resident #13 and Resident #40) reviewed for timeliness of providing Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), the facility failed to report an allegation of mistreatment to the State Agency. The findings include: 1. Resident #13's diagnoses include adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, unspecified dementia and anxiety disorder. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 was moderately cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of 1 with transfers and toileting. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 2/1/24 identified Resident #13 had a problem with determining what was real and what was not, which had proven to hinder some of his/her interactions with peers. Interventions included offering gentle reminders of reality awareness regarding time, place and surroundings. On 4/1/24 at 3:00 PM during the Resident Council meeting, Resident #13 identified…
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 before2024-04-09 · 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 observations, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #30, Resident #65) reviewed for skin conditions, the facility failed to properly transcribe physician orders resulting in physician orders not being followed (Resident #30) and failed to follow physician's orders regarding Braden Scale Assessments and weekly body audits (Resident #65). Additionally, for the only sampled resident (Resident #71) reviewed for death, the facility failed to ensure that vital signs were taken per the physician orders. The findings include: 1. Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cellulitis of left lower limb, Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA), acute kidney failure, and edema. A Nursing admission note dated 3/7/24 at 8:03 PM and written by RN #4 identified Resident #30 was alert, aware with confusion, had eschar open areas to bilateral lower extremities (BLE), with a treatment of…
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 · D2024-04-09 · 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 Based on clinical record review, review of facility policy, and interviews, for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #31 and Resident #53) who had a pressure ulcer/injury, the facility failed to ensure Braden scales and body audits were completed per the facility's policy and the physician's orders (Resident #31), and failed to ensure a low air loss mattress was set at the appropriate setting for Resident #53's weight. The findings include: 1. Resident #31's was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including femur fracture (left thigh bone), peripheral vascular disease (poor circulation in lower extremities), and heart failure. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #31 was alert and confused and required 1-2 people for assistance with bed mobility and transfers. Additionally Resident #31's skin was noted to be intact and a Braden scale identified that Resident #31 was at mild risk to develop a pressure ulcer. The admission physician's order dated 3/2/24 directed a licensed nurse 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 · D2024-04-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 5 residents (Resident #53) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure that a monthly weight and reweight was obtained after a significant weight loss. The findings include: Resident #53's diagnoses included cerebral vascular accident, dementia, and mitral valve insufficiency. Review of the Weights and Vitals Summary identified Resident #53 was weighed on 9/15/23 with a weight of 174.9 pounds and not reweighed again until 1/4/24 with a weight of 176.5 pounds. Resident #53 was not weighed in February 2024. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #53 was moderately cognitively impaired, required a mechanical lift, and was totally dependent with assist of 2 for transfers and toileting. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #53 was extensive assist of 2 for bed mobility and was independent with set up for eating. Review of the Weights and Vitals…
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 · D2024-04-09 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #61) reviewed for respiratory therapy, the facility failed to administer oxygen at the correct setting, per physician orders. The findings include: Resident #61's diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, Covid-19, and hypertension. A physician's order dated 1/11/24 directed oxygen at 2 liters (L) continuously, to maintain oxygen saturation greater than 90% every shift, for shortness of breath. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #61 was moderately cognitively impaired, was a total mechanical lift with assist of 2, extensive assistance of 1 with eating, extensive assist of 2 for bed mobility, and was dependent with assist of 2 for toileting. Also, the MDS identified that Resident #61 utilized oxygen. Observation on 3/27/24 at 12:23 PM and on 3/28/24 at 9:30 AM identified Resident #61 had a nasal cannula 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 before2024-04-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and review of the facility policy related to medication storage, the facility failed to properly secure a controlled substance and properly secure a medication storage room. The findings include: a. Interview and observation of the East medication storage room with LPN #2 on 4/2/24 at 2:30 PM identified that the controlled drug box inside of the refrigerator was unlocked and found to contain one 30 milliliter (ml) unopened bottle of Lorazepam (a schedule 4 controlled substance) 2 milligram (mg)/ml inside. An additional padlock was observed outside of the refrigerator door which was also found to be unlocked/not engaged. LPN #2 stated she was aware that the controlled drug box inside of the refrigerator had a broken lock and could not be secured. LPN #2 further identified that she had notified the Maintenance Department and the DNS but that it had not been repaired or replaced yet. Additionally, LPN #2 stated she was aware the lock outside of the refrigerator should have been secured and that she thought it was locked. Interview with the Director of…
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 before2023-10-04 · 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 one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from mistreatment. The findings include: Review of facility documentation and observations identified Resident #1 and #2 shared a room. a. Resident #1's diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, vascular dementia, anxiety disorder, and adjustment disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two (2) with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/25/2023 identified Resident #1 required staff assistance with ADL's. Interventions directed to assist as needed to meet toileting needs, provide incontinent care per policy and assist with transfers per MD…
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 · D2023-10-04 · 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 review, facility documentation review, facility policy review and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure staff provided care in accordance with the resident plan of care. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, vascular dementia, anxiety disorder, and adjustment disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two (2) with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/25/2023 identified Resident #1 required staff assistance with ADL's. Interventions directed to assist as needed to meet toileting needs, provide incontinent care per policy and assist with transfers per MD orders. Review of Resident #1's care card directed for toileting, 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 · D2023-10-04 · tag F0943 — isolatedGive their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of five employee file reviews (NA #1), the facility failed to ensure abuse education was provided and documented timely for a full-time personnel. The findings include: Review of facility documentation identified NA #1 was a full-time staff member in the facility from 10/27/2022 until 7/23/2023, then went per diem until her resignation. Additional review failed to identify resident abuse education was provided for NA #1. Review of NA #1's on-boarding/hire check list identified Resident Abuse, COVID-19, and Cognitive Impairment test education were not performed. Review of NA #1's employee file orientation checklist dated 10/27/2022 identified Abuse/Restraint Free Philosophy was not reviewed, and NA #1 was not signed off by an administrator or orientation coordinator. Interview with the DON on 10/4/2023 at 2:30 PM identified all the documentation provided was all the documents the facility had regarding NA #1's education competencies for abuse. Although the DON indicated the…
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 before2023-08-09 · 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, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one sampled resident (Residents #1) who was reviewed for an allegation of mistreatment, the facility failed to treat a resident in a manner that maintained the resident's respect and dignity. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had some short- and long-term memory deficits, required extensive two (2) person assistance with turning and repositioning while in bed and getting in and out of the bed and chair, and extensive one (1) person assistance with personal hygiene and dressing. The Resident Care Plan dated 6/30/23 identified Resident #1 had impaired memory, recall and decision-making skills. Interventions directed to allow time to respond when speaking to the resident, offer one step at a time directions, use short simple sentences. The Facility Reported Incident form 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 · E2021-12-28 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and procedures and interviews for one of two residents reviewed for dialysis (R# 50), the facility failed to ensure the resident who required dialysis receive such services in a consistent and or professional standard of practice. The findings included: Resident #50's diagnoses included, end stage renal disease, vascular dementia without behavioral disturbance, diabetes mellitus and hypertension. A quarterly assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident as moderately impaired for decision-making skills, requiring limited assistance of staff for most activities of daily living and is always steady for balance during transition and walking with an assistive device. The RCP updated on 11/3/21 identified dialysis due to chronic renal disease as the focus. Interventions included hemodialysis 3 times weekly, any questions regarding the resident ' s care contact the dialysis center, labs as ordered in facility and/or at dialysis center,…
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 before2021-12-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, facility documentation review and interviews during the medication storage and labeling review for three of three medication rooms (North, [NAME] and East Units) the facility failed to ensure medications were stored safely in the medication refrigerator. The findings include: Review of the North medication storage area on 12/28/21 at 9:10 AM with RN #1 identified that the medication refrigerator temperature was observed at 32 degrees. The north medication storage area temperature log lacked documentation of recorded temperatures for 5 days in December (12/23 to 12/27). There was 1 vial of insulin and 1 vial of Lorazepam stored in the refrigerator. Additionally, the temperature recorded for 8 of the daily checks in October and for 14 of the daily checks in the temperature recorded was below 36 degrees. Although requested the facility was unable to provide a completed North medication refrigerator log for the month of November. Interview with RN #1 on 12/28/21 at 9:10 AM identified that he was new and was not sure how often the medication refrigerator…
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 · B2025-12-04 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #68) reviewed for hospitalization, the facility failed to ensure that a bed hold notification was provided. The findings include:Resident #68 's diagnoses included chronic osteomyelitis, type 2 diabetes and end stage renal disease.The admission Resident Care Plan dated 8/28/25 identified Resident #68 was admitted following a surgical wound debridement and partial calcanectomy. Interventions included assisting the resident with keeping his/her surgical follow up appointments, providing treatment to the left heel as ordered and changing the dressing 3 times a week. A physician's order dated 8/28/25 directed to apply a wound vac to the left heel at 125 mm/Hg continuously and to change the dressing on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays.The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #68 was cognitively intact and required limited assistance with bed mobility, transfers and toilet…
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 · C2024-04-09 · tag F0575 — widespreadPost a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff/resident interviews regarding required postings, the facility failed to ensure the required information related to contact information and how to file a complaint to the State Agency was posted in the facility. The findings include: On 4/1/24 at 2:00 PM during the Resident Council meeting, Resident #10 stated he/she was not aware of how to file a grievance or make a complaint. Additionally, Resident #10 stated he/she had not observed information within the facility to direct him/her on how to make a complaint regarding his/her care. Subsequent to the Resident Council Meeting, on 4/1/24 at 3:40 PM, observations were made on all units of the facility which failed to identify that a statement and contact information on how to make a complaint to the State Survey Agency had been posted/displayed. The Administrator on 4/2/24 at 2:00 PM, was unable to provide a facility policy for making residents aware of how to contact the State Agency and stated she would have to see if there was a policy. Additionally, the Administrator failed to identify that the…
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 · B2024-04-09 · 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 and interviews for 1 of 3 nursing units observed for environment, the facility failed to ensure the building was maintained in a clean, comfortable home-like manner. The findings included: During the initial facility tour, observation on 3/27/24 at 10:41 AM on the North Unit the following was identified: a. Resident #3's call bell at the junction of the cord that connects to the wall was duct taped to the wall in two areas. b. room [ROOM NUMBER]-B was observed with a hole in the tile flooring (approximately 6 inches by 2 inches) to the left of the bed by the window. c. The shower room, utilized by 24 residents, was observed with several wooden pallets that were noted on the floor, topped with boxes of supplies (approximately 46 boxes containing incontinent briefs). Interview with the Director of Maintenance on 3/27/24 at 2:11 PM identified that the Maintenance Department was responsible for maintaining the overall upkeep of the building and that they rely on the staff to notify them when…
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 · B2021-12-28 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #16) reviewed for comprehensive assessment, the facility failed to accurately complete the comprehensive assessment. The findings include: Resident #16 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease, anemia, gastroenteritis and colitis, GI hemorrhage, IBS, anxiety, depression, rheumatoid arthritis, benign paroxysmal vertigo, history of venous thrombosis and history of pulmonary embolism. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #16 was cognitively intact, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, toileting, dressing and personal hygiene. Additionally, the MDS identified the resident required hemodialysis. The care plan dated 1/18/21 identified chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis with interventions which included to contact the dialysis center as needed 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.
“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
$27,991 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $11,190 — penalty dated 2025-01-06
- $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-04-09
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 APPLE REHAB — 20 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 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FOLEY, BRIAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 100% | since 07/01/1993 |
| SINGH, DEVIKA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 09/10/2018 |
| VESS, RYAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 03/15/2013 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $790K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CT
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 075380. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-04, 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.