Guilford House, The

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.

69.0% 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 275 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 52.8% 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 106 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 83% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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 75 beds and averages 72.3 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.44 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.69 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.70 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.50 on weekdays — 5% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.76 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% 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.

33 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-10-15 · 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 a review of clinical records, facility documentation and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) at risk for falls, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to the resident with a history of not requesting assistance with transfers and ambulation resulting in falls with a significant injury. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included progressive supranuclear ophthalmoplegia (neurodegenerative disease, causing gradual deterioration and death of specific volumes of the brain), subdural hemorrhage, repeated falls and anxiety disorder. A physician's order dated [DATE] directed Resident #1 was a contact guard assist of one with a rolling walker for ambulation (caregiver places hands on the resident to help with balance or stability). The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated [DATE] identified that Resident #1 was at risk for falls, had 4 falls within the past 6 months with interventions that included to encourage the resident to utilize the call bell for assistance, a…

  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 before2025-09-22 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #1) who were at risk for falls, the facility failed to ensure Resident #1's family was notified on the same day when the resident sustained a fall. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included heart failure, muscle weakness, difficulty in walking and cellulitis. The admission record dated 6/7/25 identified family members were Resident #1's emergency contact. The admission nurse's note dated 6/7/25 at 6:10 PM identified Resident #1 was admitted to the facility from the hospital at 5:00 PM. The note indicated Resident #1 was alert, forgetful, anxious, calling out occasionally wanting to go home and redirected to place and time. The nurse's note dated 6/8/24 at 2:07 AM identified Resident #1 was found lying on his/her side next to his/her bed. The note identified Resident #1 appeared confused pupils were equal, round, and reactive to light, there was no internal or external rotation or lengthening or shortening of all extremities, and no…

  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 · D2025-09-22 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #2) who was reviewed for misappropriation of personal property, the facility failed to ensure staff did not remove the resident's jewelry from the facility. The findings include:Resident #2's diagnoses included anemia, atrial fibrillation, and dementia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 rarely made decisions regarding tasks of daily life, and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 7/14/25 identified impaired activities of daily living as evidenced by need for assistance with washing, dressing, transfers, and walking. Interventions directed for nursing to witness denture removal at hour of sleep and place in denture cup with tablet, 1/4 side rails can be used to facilitate self-repositioning and transfers, set up for self-care will be provided with encouragement 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-01-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect 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: Resident #1's diagnoses included degenerative disease of the nervous system, cerebellar ataxia (inability to coordinate muscle movement due to disease or injury to the cerebellum/brain), and adjustment disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was alert, oriented, and was dependent with assist of two (2) with transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 11/15/2023 identified Resident #1 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) related to degenerative disease of nervous system. Interventions directed the use of a Hoyer Lift for transfers, encourage to express care needs, setup for self-care with encouragement to do as much as possible, and assistance as needed to perform tasks. The facility…

  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 · Fcited before2023-10-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a tour of the Dietary Department and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure stored food was dated when opened, expired food was discarded, and that food was stored in a clean manner and not stored on the floor. The findings included: Tour of Dietary Department on 10/16/23 at 10:40 AM with the Director of Dining Services identified the following: 1. In the walk-in refrigerator: a. 3-32-ounce containers of Greek plain yogurt expired 9/13/23. b. 2 trays full of chicken in boxes on a tray on the floor. c. 10 boxes which contained 24 loaves of wheat bread and 24 loaves flat bread was noted on the floor. 2. In the alcove by the dry storage area: a. box of 36 China brand cups stored on the floor. b. 1 box of 30 thermal coffee mugs stored on the floor. 3. In the dry storage room: a. A 2.6-ounce pack of Jello expired 8/6/23. b. A 24-ounce pack of lemon Jello dated 9/1/23, no expiration date identified. c. A 3.5-ounce vanilla pudding, 12 packs per case, 2 cases expired 8/23/23. d. A 5 pound muffin mix, 6…

  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 · D2023-10-23 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide 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 record review, interviews, and review of facility policy for 1 of 3 residents, (Resident #5), reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure timely identification and evaluation of a significant weight loss to address a 5 percent (%) loss in one month. The findings include: Resident #5's diagnosis included atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), high blood pressure, and adjustment disorder (mood, behavior, or functioning condition). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #5 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and personal hygiene. Additionally, Resident #5 was independent with eating after set-up assistance and had no prior weight loss or swallowing disorder identified. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/28/23 indicated that Resident #5 had a potential for changes in nutritional status. Interventions included providing preferences and alternatives as needed, monitoring intakes, weights, and bloodwork,…

  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 · D2023-10-23 · 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 observations, facility policy, and interviews for 4 of 5 sampled residents, (Resident #8, #35, #45, and #50), reviewed for oxygen use/respiratory conditions, the facility failed to properly store, label, and date required respiratory equipment. The findings include: 1. Resident #8's diagnoses included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and altered mental status. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #8 was moderately cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance with transfers, bed mobility, and dressing. The Resident Care Plan dated 6/2/23, identified Resident #8 had COPD. Interventions included monitoring for difficulty breathing, rapid, shallow breathing, and cough. A physician's order dated 9/23/23 directed Formoterol Fumarate Inhalation Nebulization Solution (a breathing treatment) 20 Micrograms/2 Milliliters, 2 times a day. Observation on 10/16/23 at 11:15 AM, identified that Resident #8 had a nebulizer machine on his/her bedside table with…

  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 · D2023-10-23 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide 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 observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview for the only sampled resident (Resident #13), reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to ensure emergency medical equipment was stored at the bedside. The findings include: Resident #13's diagnosis included dependence on renal dialysis, anemia in chronic kidney disease, and End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD). A physician order dated 6/8/23 directed that emergency medical equipment related to Resident #13's access device for dialysis remain at the bedside. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 was moderately cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of 1 staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 9/20/23 identified Resident #13 was at risk for potential complications related to dialysis and ESRD. Interventions included to monitor Resident #13's dressing condition for the external access device and report 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 · D2023-10-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure 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 observation, staff interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 medication storage rooms was free from expired medications. The findings include: 1. Resident #24's diagnosis included pulmonary fibrosis, hypoxemia, and hypertension. Active physician orders as of 9/1/23 directed 3 milliliters (ml) of albuterol sulfate nebulization solution 0.63 milligrams (mg)/3 ml, (prescribed for breathing problems) to be inhaled orally via nebulizer every 4 hours as needed for wheezing and shortness of breath. 2. Resident #49's diagnosis included atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and sick sinus syndrome. Observation of the 100 Unit medication storage room with LPN #2 on 10/23/23 at 1:12 PM identified house stock of two unopened bottles of aspirin, 325 mg, 100 tablets, with an expiration date of 09/2023, two boxes of albuterol sulfate 0.63 mg/3ml, 25 units per box, prescribed to Resident #24, both with expiration dates of 6/2023 and, in the medication refrigerator, although Resident #49's order had been discontinued, a bag of promethazine suppositories prescribed…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-10-23 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #32) reviewed for food, the facility failed to honor food preferences. The findings include: Resident #32's diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, malnutrition, and chronic kidney disease. The admission Resident Care Plan dated 9/8/23 identified potential for changes in nutritional status/risk for malnutrition. Interventions included providing preferences and offer alternatives as needed, resident requested liberalization of diet, consumption of 75-100% of meals, and encourage snacks. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #32 as cognitively intact, required setup help for eating, and 2 staff physical assistance for bed mobility, transfers, and personal hygiene. An APRN note dated 9/12/23 identified that Resident #32 was at risk for malnutrition secondary to diagnosis, and had a history of decreased oral intake and wounds. Observation and interview with…

  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 · D2023-10-23 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 2 residents, Resident #17, reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to update the Resident Care Plan following falls. The findings include: Resident #17's diagnosis included dementia with psychotic disturbance, anxiety, and left femur fracture. The significant change Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #17 was severely cognitively impaired and required the assistance of 1 staff with transfers and dressing. Review of facility Reportable Event and Quality Improvement Investigation form dated 4/19/23 identified that the post fall intervention directed to bring Resident #17 to the nursing desk for the remainder of the shift. Review of the facility Reportable Event and Quality Improvement Investigation form dated 4/21/23 fall intervention directed to place Resident #17 in a room with a roommate and have a NA sit outside the room on the 11-7 shift for a quicker response time. 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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

$8,824 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,824 — penalty dated 2024-10-15

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 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 $2.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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. 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