Civita Care Center At West River

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.

62.3% 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 134 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 53.7% 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 82 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 81% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 120 beds and averages 111.5 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day is at or above 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 1.91 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.81 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-01-29 · tag F0882 — pattern
  Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews the facility failed to ensure the Infection Preventionist completed specialized training in infection prevention. The findings include: The Infection Preventionist (RN #1) was hired on 11/30/2015. During entrance conference on 1/26/24 at 7:45 AM the facility failed to provide documentation that RN #1 had been awarded the certification for Nursing Home Infection Preventionist with contact hours. Upon review of facility documentation, it was identified that RN #1 had completed the Nursing Home Infection Preventionist Training Course on 4/23/24 but had not completed the final test to obtain the Infection Preventionist certificate. The facility provided documentation that the ADNS had been awarded the certification for Nursing Home Infection Preventionist on 9/4/2020. Interview with RN #1 on 1/28/25 at 8:20 AM identified that she had served as the facility's Infection Preventionist (IP) for 10 months, and that she had completed the Nursing Home Infection Preventionist Training Course and obtained 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-01-29 · tag F0887 — pattern
  Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
  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 records, facility documentation, facility policies, and interviews for 6 of 10 residents (Resident #2, 18, 79, 87, 88, and 100) reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to ensure consented residents received the 2024-2025 Covid vaccination, in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #2's clinical record identified a signed Annual Vaccinations form dated [DATE] which identified he/she or the responsible party had consented to the Covid-19 vaccine, and a physician's order dated [DATE] directed the administration of Comirnaty 2024-25 (a vaccine that helps prevent the Covid-19 virus); 30 mcg/0.3ml; intramuscular, one time. Review of the facility's Preventative Health Care Report dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 received the Covid-19 vaccination on [DATE], subsequent to surveyor inquiry. Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #18's clinical record identified a signed Annual…

  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 before2025-01-29 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #60) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to provide feeding assistance according to the physician's order to ensure a dignified dining experience. The findings include: Resident #60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, cognitive communication deficit, and diabetes. A physician's order dated 1/18/24 directed Resident #60 to receive hospice services. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #60 had severely impaired cognition, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required set up for meals and substantial assistance from staff with dressing, bathing and toileting. The care plan dated 10/29/24 identified Resident #60 had the potential for alteration in nutritional status related to dementia. Interventions included advanced meal set up, assistance with feeding, and offering individual parts of a meal at once…

  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 before2025-01-29 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #48) reviewed for advance directives, the facility failed to ensure the physician's orders were consistent with the resident's wishes for code status. The findings include: Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, diabetes, and muscle weakness. The Resident/Patient Health Care Instructions for signed and dated by Resident #48's representative at admission on [DATE] identified Resident #48's advance directive choice was do not resuscitate (DNR). Physician's order dated 5/2/24 directed Resident #48 was a full code. Review of the clinical record identified Resident #48 was hospitalized from [DATE] - 11/21/24 for pneumonia. The Resident/Patient Health Care instructions form identified Resident #48 requested do not resuscitate (DNR). The form was signed and dated by Resident #48's representative on 11/21/24. The form further…

  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 · D2025-01-29 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #56 and 84) reviewed for a specialty medical treatment and/or nutrition, for Resident #56 the facility failed to notify the physician and/or and the specialized treatment center when the resident was over the fluid restriction and for Resident #84 the facility failed to ensure the physician and resident representative were notified when the resident had a weight loss. The findings include: 1. Resident #56 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease requiring peritoneal dialysis and a stroke affecting the right dominant side. A monthly physician's order dated 11/8/24 directed a fluid restriction of 1000 ml per day. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #56 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance with toileting and personal hygiene. The care plan dated 11/29/24 identified Resident #56 receives peritoneal dialysis…

  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 · D2025-01-29 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #70) reviewed for pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR), the facility failed to ensure the State-designated authority was notified when the resident was diagnoses with a new mental health diagnosis (10/20/21) and again when the physician discontinued the mental health diagnosis on 10/13/23. The findings include: Review of a PASARR Level 1 screen dated 8/5/21 identified no level 2 required. Resident #70 has anxiety and depression and was receiving Klonopin (anxiety medication), Lexapro (antidepressant medication), and Wellbutrin (antidepressant). If changes occur or new information refutes these findings, a new screen must be submitted. Resident #70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included anxiety, depression, and dysthymic disorder (mild but long-term depression). The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #70 had intact cognition, 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #24, 81 and 312) reviewed for nutrition and/or choices, for Resident #24 the facility failed to ensure the air mattress was set per the physician's order, for Resident #81 the facility failed to ensure the resident had close supervision during meals and for Resident #312 the facility failed to ensure that weights were obtained per the physician's order The findings include: 1. Resident #24 was re-admitted to the facility in September 2024 with diagnoses that included stroke and a stage 4 pressure ulcer. The annual MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #24 had severely impaired cognition and was dependent requiring total assistance for dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #24 was always incontinent of bladder and frequently incontinent of bowel and at risk for developing a pressure ulcer. A physician's order dated 12/3/24 directed to utilize a specialty mattress with the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #37) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to complete the Braden Scale (a tool used to assess a resident's risk of developing a pressure ulcer) weekly after admission per the physician's order, failed to ensure that a wound care physician's recommendation was implemented, and failed to ensure that a thorough RN assessment of the residents pressure ulcers was completed following re-admission. The findings include: Resident #37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's dementia, muscle weakness, and anemia. A physician's order dated 11/14/22 directed to complete a Braden Scale weekly for 4 weeks. A Braden Scale dated 11/14/22 identified Resident #37 had a score of 20, indicating the resident was not at risk for the development of pressure ulcers. a. Review of the clinical record failed to identify any additional weekly Braden scale…

  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 before2025-01-29 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 (Resident #84) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to address a weight loss according to professional standards and facility policy. The findings include: Resident #84 was admitted to the facility in July 2024 with diagnoses that included stroke, dysphasia, and dementia. Review of the weight record dated 7/24/24 identified Resident #84 weighed 156 lbs. A physician's order dated 8/13/24 directed to weigh the resident daily and if weight loss is greater than 2 lbs. in a day or 5 lbs. in 7 days notify the physician/APRN. A physician's order dated 8/14/24 directed to provide a dysphasia puree diet but allow ground meats and soft sandwiches and thin liquids. Additionally, provide house supplement 237 ml twice a day. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #84 had severely impaired cognition, was independent to eat, did not have a weight loss of 5% in the last month or loss of 10% in the last 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-29 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #56) reviewed for a specialized medical treatment and who had orders for a 1000 ml fluid restriction, the facility failed to consistently monitor fluid intake to ensure the resident was within the fluid restriction and implement measures according to professional standards. The findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease requiring peritoneal dialysis. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #56 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance with toileting and personal hygiene. The care plan dated 11/29/24 identified Resident #56 receives peritoneal dialysis for end stage renal disease. Interventions included monitoring fluid intake and a fluid restriction of 1000 ml per 24 hours. Review of the December 2024 monthly physician's order directed a fluid restriction of 1000 ml per day and to provide 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

“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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CIVITA CARE CENTERS — 6 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 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.

About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $772K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CT