No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Bride Brook Rehabilitation & Nursing Center

23 Liberty Way, Niantic, CT 06357 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 130 certified beds · (860) 739-4007 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (860) 739-4007 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
8 Vista Dr Ste 2 · (860) 434-8847 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
58 Pennsylvania Ave · (860) 691-0380 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
4 Green Valley Lake Rd · (860) 739-7373 · Call to confirm hours
Park
221 W Main St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased9.9%18.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.9%6.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.7%22.3%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.9%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.2%16.4%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.4%17.6%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.7%4.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.6%24.7%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.1%17.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.6%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%69.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.3%24.3%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.2%10.7%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.192.061.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.631.461.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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.

65.5% 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 315 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

65.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
63.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.57U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.26hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 63.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 177 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 0.57 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 87% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 49% 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF65.5%CMS range 58.9–69.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.7%CMS range 6.5–11.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge63.3%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge69.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge53.7%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting96.8%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.5%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 4.9–9.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.101.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.92
RN hours/ resident / day
0.81
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.01
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.74
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.65
RN hoursweekends
33.9%
Total nursing turnover
13.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 130 beds and averages 124.9 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.92 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.17 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.97 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.04 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-23)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2023-07-05)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-23 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #5) who required assistance for nail care, the facility failed to ensure the resident's nails were clean and trimmed. The findings include: Resident #5's diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and repeated falls. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, required touching assistance for personal hygiene, was a partial to moderate assistance for toileting, bathing, lower body dressing, and was independent for eating, and oral hygiene. The assessment further identified the resident was able to ambulate using a walker and was dependent when using a wheelchair. The care plan dated 2/12/25 identified Resident #5 had a self-care deficit related to generalized weakness and impaired mobility, which required assistance with personal hygiene, bathing, nail care and transfers. It…

    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 · D2025-04-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, review of facility policy, and interviews for one sample resident (Resident #61) reviewed for skin condition, the facility failed to ensure treatment to a wound was provided timely and for one of five sampled residents (Resident #83) reviewed for unnecessary medication the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were implemented and completed as prescribed by the physician. The findings include: 1. Resident #61 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included foot drop, arterial disease, muscle wasting and atrophy. The admission nurse's note dated 1/3/25 at 9:16 PM identified Resident #61 was alert and oriented, had a left second toe amputation and the left third toe had a scabbed area that measured 0.5 centimeters (cm) in length by 0.5 cm in width. The 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #61 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance with toileting, personal hygiene, bed mobility, and transfers. The care plan dated…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-05 · 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 one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pain management, the facility failed to ensure a complete and accurate medical record regarding physician notification with a change in status. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included fracture of the shaft of the left femur (straight part of the thigh bone running from below the hip to the knee) and age-related osteoporosis (weak and brittle bones). The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 12/4/24 identified that Resident #1 had acute pain with interventions that included for staff to notify the physician if interventions are unsuccessful, or if the current complaint is a significant change from the resident's past experience of pain. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of nine (9) indicative of moderately impaired cognition and required substantial…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-17 · 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 clinical record review, interviews and review of facility policy for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights, the facility failed to ensure a resident's privacy was protected. The findings included: Resident #1 had diagnoses of dementia, generalized anxiety disorder, and unspecified cerebrovascular disease. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as severely cognitively impaired and required moderate assistance with oral hygiene and toileting hygiene, and supervision or touching assistance with eating. Review of Resident #1's care plan dated 6/26/24 identified a history of cerebrovascular accident/transient ischemic attacks with interventions that directed to ensure diet is the correct consistency to facilitate safe swallowing, monitor/document abilities for activities of daily living, assist as needed, and encourage the resident to do what he/she can do for his/herself. Interview with Person #1 on 9/17/24 at 9:32 AM…

    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 · E2023-07-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations, review of facility policy and interviews for three of six sampled residents (Residents #12, #35 and #521) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure that oxygen tubing was changed on a consistent basis, labeled, and dated. The finding include: 1. Resident #12's diagnoses included spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, vascular dementia, and cervical disc disorder. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #12 had severe cognitive impairment, required total dependence for bed mobility, transfers, locomotion, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Observation on 6/26/23 at 11:20 AM identified Resident #12 with oxygen in place via nasal cannula at 3 Liters via concentrator. The tubing was without the benefit of a label on the tubing that consisted of the date, time, and the initial of the individual who changed the tubing. Observation on 6/27/23 at 9:35 AM identified Resident #12 with oxygen in place via nasal…

    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 · D2023-07-05 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review and interviews for one of five sampled residents (Resident #112) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure the resident was transferred with the assistance of two staff as ordered, resulting in the resident sustaining a fall. The findings include: Resident #112 's diagnoses included cerebral infarction, hemiplegia, hemiparesis to right dominant side, aphasia, and atrial fibrillation. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #112 had severe cognitive impairment, required extensive assist for bed mobility, toileting and hygiene and transfers. Assessment further noted Resident #112 was non ambulatory and utilized a wheelchair for mobility. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/29/23 identified Resident # 112 was at risk for falls related to poor mobility, hemiplegia, stroke and other abnormalities of gait and mobility. Care plan intervention identified: anticipate and meet resident's needs,…

    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 · D2023-07-05 · 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, clinical record reviews, interviews, and facility policy for two of three sampled residents (Resident #12, #73 and Resident #521) reviewed for respiratory therapy, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for a prescribed oxygen administration rate, failed to follow a physician's order to monitor oxygen saturation levels, and failed to have a protocol or policy to indicate settings for the titration of oxygen. The findings include: 1. Resident #12's diagnoses included spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, vascular dementia, and cervical disc disorder. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #12 was severely cognitively impaired, and was totally dependent on staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #12's care plan dated 4/24/19 identified Resident #12 had an altered respiratory status with interventions that included observing for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress and decreased pulse…

    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 · D2023-07-05 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management 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 the one sampled resident, (Resident #570), reviewed for pain, the facility failed to notify the physician when the resident requested an increase in pain medication being administered. The findings include: Resident #570 has diagnoses included muscle wasting and a history of myocardial infarction (heart attack). The initial Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #570 was cognitively intact, required set up help for eating, supervision for transfers, and extensive assistance with dressing. The Resident Care Plan dated 6/20/23 identified that Resident #570 was at risk for falls, had generalized pain, and required assistance with activities of daily living. Interventions included Resident #570 should ask for assistance with mobility and staff should monitor and record the resident's pain. A physician's order dated 6/20/23 directed to observe and document pain every shift and to provide…

    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 before2023-07-05 · 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 and interview, for 1 of 4 medication carts reviewed for medication storage, the facility failed to secure a controlled substance appropriately. The findings include: During inspection of the first floor medication cart on 6/30/23 at 2:06 PM, an opened, unlabeled (no resident name or date opened) single blister pack (medication package) labeled Oxycodone HCl 5 milligrams was noted. The opened blister pack contained ½ of a white pill. Interview with LPN #3 on 6/30/23 at 2:06 PM identified that she had not administered any Oxycodone to a resident during her shift. LPN #3 identified that the blister pack did not belong to a resident and appeared to have been taken from the facility's emergency narcotic supply. Additionally, LPN #3 identified that as a narcotic, it should not have been stored in the top medication drawer but should have been double locked in the narcotic box located within a drawer of the medication cart. Interview with the DNS on 6/29/23 at 2:45 PM identified he had investigated how the medication had been placed inappropriately in the medication…

    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 · Ecited before2021-05-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the clinical records, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for four of six residents (Resident #1, Resident #28, Resident #95 and Resident #300) reviewed for infection control, the facility failed to ensure the safe storage of prescribed medications. The findings include: 1. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in 4/2021 with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, fibromyalgia and adjustment disorder with depressed mood. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact. The physician's order dated 4/15/2021 directed to administer Flonase Suspension 50mcg/act, 2 sprays in each nostril in the morning for allergies. Observation of the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) bin on 4/28/2021 at 1:45 PM located outside of Resident #1's room on the COVID Observation Unit identified an open box of Flonase Suspension 50mcg/act with an open pack of disposable gowns inside the clean and unlocked…

    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 · D2021-05-04 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    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 and staff interviews for one of fourteen residents (Resident #80) reviewed for dining services, the facility failed to ensure that a meal provided to a resident accommodated the resident's allergies, and intolerances. The findings include: Resident #80 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included major depression, mild cognitive impairment, and anxiety. The physician order dated 2/1/2021 and directed a regular diet. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified intact cognition and Resident #80 could eat by him/herself with set up help. Review of the Resident care plan (RCP) dated 4/13/2021 identified a list of food allergies that included avocado, banana, lettuce, melon. Additionally, the care plan identified a problem with nutrition and directed to administer diet as ordered. Observation and interview with Resident #80 on 4/30/2021 at 8:16 AM identified a breakfast tray on Resident #80's bedside table that contained…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ATLAS HEALTHCARE — 29 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.6+1.4 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.1+1.9 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.3+1.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 28 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
2 of 5Atlas Post Acute At Woodbury Country ClubWoodbury, NJ 2 of 5Haverhill Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterHaverhill, MA 2 of 5Port Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterNewburyport, MA 2 of 5Rossville Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBaltimore, MD 2 of 5The Elms Rehab And Healthcare Center Of CranburyCranbury, NJ 2 of 5Village Green Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBristol, CT 2 of 5Wynwood Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterCinnaminson, NJ 3 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation And Healthcare At Daughters OClifton, NJ 3 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation And Healthcare At WashingtonSewell, NJ 3 of 5Masconomet Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterTopsfield, MA 3 of 5Nemasket Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMiddleborough, MA 3 of 5Oak Knoll Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterFramingham, MA 3 of 5Roland Park Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBaltimore, MD 4 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation And Healthcare At MaywoodMaywood, NJ 4 of 5Cedar Grove Respiratory And Nursing CenterWilliamstown, NJ 4 of 5Hathorne Hill Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterDanvers, MA 4 of 5Meadowbrook Respiratory And Nursing CenterMatawan, NJ 4 of 5Mystic Meadows Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterLittle Egg Harbor Tw, NJ 4 of 5Shrewsbury Rehabilitation And Nursing At SouthgateShrewsbury, MA 4 of 5Sippican Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMarion, MA 4 of 5Suffield House Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenteSuffield, CT 4 of 5Towson Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterTowson, MD 5 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation & Healthcare At West DeptforWest Deptford, NJ 5 of 5Birchwood Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterCranford, NJ 5 of 5Manchester Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterManchester, CT 5 of 5Pendleton Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterMystic, CT 5 of 5Vernon Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterVernon, CT 5 of 5Waterfront Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterRaritan, NJ

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CT-2 OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 09/01/2022
JMH FAMILY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
JMH FAMILY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
MLS FAMILY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
MLS FAMILY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
SGS FAMILY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
SGS FAMILY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
BAK, PINCHOSIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
CT-2 OPCO MANAGER LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
DONKA, ABELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
DVORAK, AMYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
GOLDBERGER, SHLOMOIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
GOTTLIEB, MOSHEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
MAILLOUX, LISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
SONNENSCHEIN, MOSHEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
MALT FAMILY TRUSTOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2022
SGS 2010 FAMILY TRUSTOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2022
TYH 2017 TRUSTOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2022
23 LIBERTY WAY REALTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
BRIDE BROOK REALTY HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 43 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

13 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.

$14.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+17.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$308K
Related-party expense3% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 44%Medicare 20%Other / private 35%

This home reported $308K 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

$370per resident / day
operating cost
$11,252per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$447per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Connecticut Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Connecticut
$15,208/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$9,118/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 075375. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-23, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next