Autumn Lake Healthcare At Glen Hill

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.

63.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 317 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 73.3% 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 101 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 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 100 beds and averages 93.5 residents a day — about 94% 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.88 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 3.17 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.37 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.76 to 0.58 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations of kitchen, facility policy and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was served in safe and sanitary conditions. The findings include: An observation of the noon meal plating service in the kitchen on 6/6/25 at 11:40AM identified an open industrial garbage can with trash filled to the top; opened with no lid to cover the garbage can while food was being plated from the steam table. The garbage can was to the right of the steam table and 15 feet (ft.) away. The garbage can was opened by steam table for a half hour of the serving time of food from the steam table until 12:10PM. An interview with the Dietary Manager on 6/6/25 at 12:00PM identified the garbage can should have been covered and not in proximity to the steam table while food was being plated. The Dietary Manager further indicated that all kitchen staff is responsibility for ensuring garbage cans are removed and covered during meal service. After surveyor inquiry, the Dietary Manger had a dietary aide cover and move the garbage can from the serving area. A review of the Environment Policy…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-09 · 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 observations, review of clinical records, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident # 41 and Resident # 71). The facility failed to ensure the residents were served lunch at the same time. The findings include: 1. Resident # 71 diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dysphagia and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #71 as severally cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 and was independent with eating. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/10/25 identified potential nutritional risk as an area of concern. Interventions included: to provide a ground diet as ordered, encourage fluids, honor food preferences for meals, monitor intake of all meals and offer alternatives as needed, and report any declines and inability to self-feed. The physician's orders dated 6/1/25 directed to provide regular diet with ground texture, allow ice cream, soft breads, cakes,…

  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 · D2025-06-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
  Develop 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, interviews and facility policy for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #25) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation regarding an allegation of injury of unknown origin. The findings include: Resident #25's diagnoses included dementia, involuntary movements and age-related osteoarthritis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #25 as severely cognitively impaired and unable to participate in Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and noted totally dependent on staff for personal hygiene, transfers, toileting and bed mobility. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/25/24 identified Resident #25 as being dependent for activities of daily living as an area on concerns. Interventions included: to provide assist of 2 staff members for bed mobility, ¼ siderails to assist with bed mobility and positioning, provide cueing for safety and sequencing to maximize current level of functioning 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-09 · 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 reviews, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #25) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the plan of care for assistance of 2 staff members for all care provided was followed and for the only sampled resident ( Resident #46), the facility failed to develop a comprehensive plan of care to address the residents respiratory and sensory needs. The findings included: 1.Resident #25's diagnoses included dementia, involuntary movements and age-related osteoarthritis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #25 as severely cognitively impaired and unable to participate in Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and was totally dependent on staff for personal hygiene, transfers, toileting and bed mobility. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/25/24 identified Resident #25 as being dependent for activities of daily living as an area on concerns. Interventions included: to provide assist of 2 staff members for…

  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 · D2025-06-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record interview and facility policy and interviews for the only residents (Resident # 50) reviewed for bladder and bowel incontinence, the facility failed to ensure staff revised the care plan to reflect the current resident status. The findings include: Resident #50's diagnosis included overactive bladder, urge incontinence and Congestive Heart Failure (CHF). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated in part Resident #50 was cognitively intact and required substantial assistance with toileting, used a wheelchair and had a functional limitation with range of motion of one lower extremity. The MDS further indicated Resident #50 was frequently incontinent of urine and always incontinent of bowel, no trial of a toileting program (scheduled toileting, prompted voiding or bladder training and no toileting program was being used to manage the bowel incontinence. The care plan initiated 4/3/2024 indicated Resident #50 was incontinent of bowel and bladder 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  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 policy and staff interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident # 13) reviewed for ADL, the facility failed to ensure a resident received incontinence care promptly. The findings include: Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart disease. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 was cognitively intact, required partial/moderate assistance for toileting hygiene, and was frequently incontinent of the bladder. On 6/3/2025 at 1:49 PM, an interview with Resident #13 identified two weeks prior, the resident had to wait about 2 hours to get changed after an incontinence episode. Resident #13 indicated that although there were two male aides available, the resident preferred a female to help him/her with incontinence care. Resident #13 indicated she/he spoke to a female nurse and a female supervisor but was told to wait for the female aide to become available. On 6/4/2025 at 2:33 PM, 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  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 interview and facility policy and interviews for the only residents (Resident # 50) reviewed for bladder and bowel incontinence, the facility failed to ensure attempts were made to restore the residents bladder. The findings include: Resident #50's diagnosis included overactive bladder, urge incontinence and Congestive Heart Failure (CHF). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated in part Resident #50 was cognitively intact and required substantial assistance with toileting, used a wheelchair and had a functional limitation with range of motion of one lower extremity. The MDS further indicated Resident #50 was frequently incontinent of urine and always incontinent of bowel, no trial of a toileting program (scheduled toileting, prompted voiding or bladder training and no toileting program was being used to manage the bowel incontinence. The care plan initiated 4/3/2024 indicated Resident #50 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and was unable 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-09 · 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 clinical record review, observation, facility policy and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #46) reviewed for Respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure oxygen physician's order were current. The findings include: Resident #46's diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, pneumonia, unspecified organism and insomnia, unspecified. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #46 was cognitively intact and independent for eating, touching assistance for oral hygiene and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #46 care plan did not include interventions for respiratory care. The Resident care plan did not identify any behaviors of refusal of care. A physician's order dated 5/16/25 directed, Oxygen at 1 Liter per minute via Nasal Cannula continuously. The nurse's note from 5/28/25 through 6/5/25 did not indicate any refusal of treatment. Observation on 6/03/25 at 11:31 AM of Resident # 46 being assisted back to his/her room identified no oxygen…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide 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, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident #48) reviewed for foley catheters, the facility failed to ensure the foley catheter drainage bag was not touching the floor when in wheelchair. The findings included: Resident #48's diagnoses included congenital stricture of urethra, obstructive and reflex uropathy and urinary retention. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #48 was moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 indicating the resident required moderate assistance for personal hygiene, dressing, transfers, utilizing a wheelchair for mobility and had an indwelling suprapubic urinary catheter (empties urine directly from the bladder from an opening in the abdomen). The Resident Care Plan dated 3/7/25 identified suprapubic catheter related to urinary retention as an area of concern. Interventions included: to change…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-09 · 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 clinical record review, observations, review of the clinical record and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent a fall. The findings include: Resident #42's diagnoses included Parkinson's Disease, Cerebral Infarction (stroke) with Hemiplegia (paralysis on one side) and Hemiparesis (weakness on one side) affecting right dominant side, and vascular dementia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #42 was severely cognitively impaired and required maximal assistance (helper does more than half the effort) with toileting hygiene, personal hygiene, and toilet transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/11/24 identified falls as an area of concern. Interventions included: to provide education to Resident #42's family on fall prevention and to not to leave the resident alone. The RCP was updated on 6/1/25 with a new intervention that aimed at gathering all items needed prior 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.

  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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CT