Pilgrim Manor

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

58.4% 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 119 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 73.5% 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 49 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 31% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 54.3 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.94 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.86 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.42 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 3.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.06 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.94 to 0.64 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

16 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-04-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, and interviews for 4 of 5 residents (Resident #304) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to appropriately supervise a resident resulting in a fall with a major injury. The findings include: Resident #304 's diagnoses included dementia, anxiety, history of a transient cerebral ischemic attack (TIA), atrial fibrillation, and blindness. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #304 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, and personal hygiene. Additionally, Resident #304 had balance issues during transitions when moving from a seated to standing position and surface to surface transfers between the bed and chair or wheelchair. Review of the Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect from 5/1/23 through 5/31/23 identified that Resident #304 was at risk for falls and required assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL's). Interventions included…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-01 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated in a respectful and dignified manner. The findings include: Resident #2 had diagnoses that included anxiety, depression, fracture of the 7th rib, and hypertension. The quarterly [NAME] Data Set (MDS) assessement dated 1/31/2025 identified Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of thirteen (13) indicative of intact cognition, was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder, required moderate assistance with ADLs, bed mobility, and transfers. The nurse's note dated 4/13/2025 at 3:47 P.M. written by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 identified Resident #2 presented a complaint about disrespectful comments from Nurse Aide (NA) #1 and indicated Registered Nurse (RN) #1 spoke with Resident #2. The facility's reportable event form dated 4/14/2025 at 10:06 A.M. identified 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-01 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the state agency. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included dementia with severe anxiety, depression, adult failure to thrive, weakness, difficulty walking, and unsteadiness on feet. The quarterly [NAME] Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3) indicative of severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder, and dependent on staff for ADLs including bed mobility, transfers, was non ambulatory and dependent on staff for mobility in the wheelchair. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/20/2025 identified at times Resident #1 refused or was combative with care, refused medications with interventions that directed to notify the provider and family of refusals of care and showers…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-01 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation for an allegation of abuse. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included dementia with severe anxiety, depression, adult failure to thrive, weakness, difficulty walking, and unsteadiness on feet. The quarterly [NAME] Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3) indicative of severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder, and dependent on staff for ADLs including bed mobility, transfers, was non ambulatory and dependent on staff for mobility in the wheelchair. The Resident Care Plan dated 2/20/2025 identified at times Resident #1 refused or was combative with care, refused medications with interventions that directed to notify the provider and family 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure appropriate interventions were implemented following an allegation of staff-to-resident verbal abuse. The findings include: Resident #2 had diagnoses that included anxiety, depression, fracture of the 7th rib, and hypertension. The quarterly [NAME] Data Set (MDS) assessement dated 1/31/2025 identified Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of thirteen (13) indicative of intact cognition, was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder, required moderate assistance with ADLs, bed mobility, and transfers. The nurse's note dated 4/13/2025 at 3:47 P.M. written by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 identified Resident #2 presented a complaint about disrespectful comments from Nurse Aide (NA) #1 and indicated Registered Nurse (RN) #1 spoke with Resident #2. The facility's reportable event 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who was a re-admission and had a foot ulcer, the facility failed to develop a care plan that addressed a diabetic ulcer to ensure interventions were implemented for the prevention and treatment of wounds. The findings include: Resident #1 diagnoses included kidney failure, chronic heart failure, open wound right ankle, and type 2 diabetes mellitus with polyneuropathy. The admission physician's order dated 3/8/24 directed for wound treatments however, the orders failed to address the use of pressure relieving devices or protective boots to the feet. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 made reasonable and consistent decisions regarding tasks of daily life, was at risk of developing pressure ulcers, had an unhealed pressure ulcer Stage I or higher, a diabetic foot ulcer, and skin and ulcer treatments noted were pressure reducing device…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-23 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, review of the clinical record and facility policy for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #454) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to include in the Resident Baseline Care Plan interventions to prevent falls for a resident who sustained a fall with injury prior to admission and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #554) reviewed for pressure ulcers, failed to initiate a Resident Baseline Care Plan for a resident admitted with an unstageable pressure ulcer. The findings include: 1. Resident #454 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a displaced fracture of the anterior wall of the left acetabular (broken hip), dementia, and difficulty walking. A physician's order dated 3/25/24 directed no ambulation and to transfer using a mechanical lift with a two person assist. The Resident, Baseline Care Plan dated 3/25/24 identified that Resident #454 was a fall risk and had weight bearing restrictions with goals to maintain safety and to be free from falls/injury, however, did…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-23 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #304) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to assess the resident's neurological status and failed to complete a fall assessment following a fall with head injury per the facility policy. The findings include: Resident #304 's diagnoses included dementia, anxiety, history of a transient cerebral ischemic attack (TIA), atrial fibrillation, and blindness. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #304 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, and personal hygiene. Additionally, Resident #304 had balance issues during transitions when moving from a seated to standing position, and surface to surface transfers between the bed and chair or wheelchair. Review of the Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect from 5/1/23 through 5/31/23 identified that Resident #304 was at risk for falls and required…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #19) reviewed for a change in condition, the facility failed to correctly transcribe physician's orders for a medication, Synthroid. The findings include: Resident #19 's diagnoses included hypothyroidism, metabolic encephalopathy, and Vascular Dementia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #19 was moderately cognitively impaired and required, maximal assistance with bed mobility, moderate assistance with eating and was dependent with toileting hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 4/6/22 identified issues with Activities of daily living. Interventions included providing all nourishment and medication through the G-Tube. Interview with Person #3 on 4/17/24 at 1:40 PM indicated that in 2022 Resident #19 had been receiving Synthroid 125 mcg, however, should have received Synthroid 62.2 mcg (one half of the 125 mcg dose). Person #3 reported the facility had requested to change 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-23 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy, facility documentation, and interviews for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #554) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure a low air loss mattress was set at the appropriate setting for Resident #554's weight, and failed to assess and measure a community acquired pressure ulcer on admission. The findings include: Resident #554's diagnoses included hemarthrosis (bleeding into the joint cavity) of the right hip, unsteadiness on feet, and intervertebral disc disorder with radiculopathy (pinching of a nerve in the spinal column). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #554 was cognitively intact and was dependent on staff for bed mobility and toileting. Additionally, the MDS indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with an unstageable community acquired pressure ulcer. Review of discharge summary paperwork from Hartford Hospital dated 4/8/24 identified that resident was followed by…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, review of the clinical record and facility policy for the only sampled resident (Resident #13) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to provide oxygen therapy consistent with professional standards of practice. The findings include: Resident #13's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute respiratory failure, and shortness of breath. A physician's order dated 3/19/24 directed to administer oxygen at 6 liters (L) via nasal cannula. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 was without cognitive impairment and required partial/moderate assistance with toileting, showering, dressing, and personal hygiene. Walking was not attempted due to Resident #13's medical condition or safety concerns. Additionally, the MDS identified that Resident #13 received oxygen therapy. The Resident Care Plan dated 3/27/24 identified a problem with respiratory status. Interventions included to assess and monitor respiratory…

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

$12,048 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $12,048 — penalty dated 2024-04-23

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 COVENANT LIVING — 15 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $686K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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