Bradley Home Infirmary/Pavilion

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.

55.7% 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 43 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 64.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 25 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 42% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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 30 beds and averages 29.1 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 1 bed 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 4.07 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.18 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.38 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 3.54 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.28 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.30 to 0.89 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 22% is below 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 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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2026-01-05 · 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, facility documentation, facility policies, and interviews, for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who required staff assistance for ambulation, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision during ambulation with a rolling walker, which resulted in a fall with a right femoral neck fracture requiring surgical intervention. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, lack of coordination, abnormal posture, and generalized weakness. The amended quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7), short and long-term memory recall deficits and was dependent on staff for transfers in and out of the bed and chair and for ambulation with a rolling walker. The fall risk assessment completed 11/21/25 identified Resident #1 was at high risk of falls. The Resident Care Plan dated 11/21/25 identified Resident #1 had a self-care…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-02-03 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — pattern
  Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
  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 three (3) of three (3) sampled residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) who were reviewed for the use of antipsychotic medication, the facility failed to ensure the resident's targeted behaviors were being monitored. The findings include:1. Resident #1's diagnoses included bipolar disorder, depressive episodes and Alzheimer's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine (9) out of fifteen (15) indicating Resident #1 had some memory recall deficits. The Resident Care Plan dated 12/23/25 identified Resident #1 received an antipsychotic medication related to a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Interventions included observing for target behaviors of excessive crying and suicidal ideation. A physician's order initiated on 11/25/25 directed to administer Aripiprazole 5 mg by mouth in the morning for bipolar disorder and on 1/13/26…

  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 · Dcited before2026-02-03 · 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for a change in condition, the facility failed to ensure a complete and accurate clinical record to include an antipsychotic medication was transcribed correctly and signed off as administered. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included bipolar disorder, depressive episodes and Alzheimer's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine (9) out of fifteen (15) indicating Resident #1 had some memory recall deficits. The Resident Care Plan dated 12/23/25 identified Resident #1 received an antipsychotic medication related to a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Interventions included observing for targeted behaviors of excessive crying and suicidal ideation. A physician's order dated 11/25/25 directed to administer Aripiprazole 5 mg by mouth in the morning…

  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 · Ecited before2025-03-10 · 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 the tour of the Dietary Department, observations, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Dietary Department served food at temperatures outside of the danger zone and failed to ensure foods reheated by nursing staff were served at safe temperatures. The findings included: 1. Observation of the tray line on 3/6/2025 at 11:42 AM identified a test tray was placed on the only Pavilion meal delivery cart at 12:02 PM and the cart was brought through the dining room onto the nursing unit. The meal delivery cart was observed to be a Bunn rack and was covered with a zippered clear plastic cover that went over the top of the Bunn rack and zipped along the front corners of the rack. The meal plates on the trays inside the rack were covered with clear hard plastic covers that did not contain warming pellets. All meal trays were delivered to the residents by Nurse Aide (NA) #2. Interview with the Assistant Food Service Director (Asst Food Service Dir) on 3/6/2025 at 12:05 PM identified that for breakfast meal service, all residents ate…

  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 · D2025-03-10 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #14) reviewed for choices, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to choose. The findings include: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility in September of 2024 with diagnoses that included dementia, chronic kidney disease, muscle weakness, and dysphagia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was cognitively intact (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13), independent with eating, oral hygiene and toileting, required supervision or touching assistance for personal hygiene and was independent for bed mobility and transfers. The MDS identified that Resident #14 and his/her family participated in assessment and goal setting. The MDS did not identify Resident #14 with a swallowing disorder, coughing or choking during meals or when swallowing medications, or complaints of difficulty or pain with swallowing. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/2/25…

  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 before2025-03-10 · 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 review, review of facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for elopement, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident at risk of elopement. The findings include: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility in September of 2024 with diagnoses that included dementia, chronic kidney disease and hypertension. An Elopement Risk assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was at low risk for elopement. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was severely cognitively impaired (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6), required assistance for eating, supervision or touching assistance for personal hygiene and was independent for bed mobility and transfers. The MDS identified that Resident #14 ambulated with a walker. Resident Care Plan dated 10/9/24 identified Resident #14 had cognitive loss related to dementia. Interventions included reorienting and supervising as needed,…

  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 · D2025-03-10 · 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 observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for skin conditions and 1 of 1 residents (Resident #11) reviewed for Urinary Tract Infections (UTI), the facility failed to revise resident care plans (RCP) after changes in condition occurred. The findings include: 1. Resident #10 was admitted to the facility in August of 2023 with diagnoses that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), hypoosmolality and hyponatremia (excess water in the body and low sodium levels) and chronic kidney disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #10 was severely cognitively impaired (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3), required set up assistance for eating, supervision for bed mobility, and partial/moderate assistance for toileting and transfers. The RCP dated 1/16/25 identified Resident #10 was at risk for impaired skin integrity. Interventions included ensuring properly…

  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 · D2025-03-10 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolated
  Provide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #14) reviewed for choices, the facility failed to identify and promote individualized care for a resident who voiced goals of care requests. The findings include: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility in September of 2024 with diagnoses that included dementia, chronic kidney disease, muscle weakness, and dysphagia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 was cognitively intact (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13), independent with eating, oral hygiene and toileting, required supervision or touching assistance for personal hygiene and was independent for bed mobility and transfers. The MDS identified that Resident #14 and his/her family participated in assessment and goal setting. The MDS did not identify Resident #14 with a swallowing disorder, coughing or choking during meals or when swallowing medications, or complaints of difficulty or pain…

  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 · E2023-05-11 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  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 clinical record reviews, review of polices and interviews for 6 of 9 residents (Resident #3, #8, #9, #12, #22 and #26) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to ensure the residents had identification bands during medication administration and for 3 of 9 residents (Residents #8, #12, #22), the facility failed to follow safe medication administration practices when identifying the right resident through electronic health record picture. The findings included: 1. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, vascular dementia, and anxiety disorder. 2. Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included acute kidney failure, diabetes mellitus type 2, hearing loss and depressive disorder. 3. Resident # 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depressive disorder, and vascular dementia. 4. Resident #12 was admitted to 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  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 record reviews, review of policy and staff interviews for 7 of 7 sampled residents (Resident #6, Resident #9, Resident #10, Resident #16, Resident #21, Resident #24, and Resident #26) reviewed for clinical documentation, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record regarding residents' alcohol consumption during recreational activities. The findings included: 1. Resident #6's diagnoses included Altered Mental Status, Alzheimer's Disease, Transient Cerebral Ischemic Attack, Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Supraventricular Tachycardia. An Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #6 as severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance with one person for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #6 required limited assistance with one person for dressing and set up assistance for eating. An RCP dated 5/10/23 identified Resident #6 was at risk for bleeding related to Aspirin use with interventions to obtain…

  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 before2023-05-11 · 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 staff interviews and record review for 1 sampled resident (Resident #9) reviewed for alcohol use, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was implemented for a resident who consumed alcohol during recreational activities. The findings include: Resident #9's diagnoses included vascular dementia, atrial fibrillation, Major Depressive Disorder, heart failure and diabetes mellitus. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #9 as cognitively intact and required no assistance with transfers, dressing, and eating. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #9 required set up assistance with bed mobility and toilet use. The care plan dated 5/4/23 identified Resident # 9 at risk for bleeding related to use of Xarelto (anticoagulation therapy). Interventions included to obtain laboratory blood work as ordered, provide medications as ordered, check neurological status as needed, observe for mental status changes, and to monitor for difficulty with speaking,…

  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

$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,278 — penalty dated 2026-01-05

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 19 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

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