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

Portland Care & Rehab Centre, INC

333 Main St, Portland, CT 06480 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 65 certified beds · (860) 342-0370 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (860) 342-0370 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation$10,033 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (16% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $10,033 in federal fines (most recent 2024-06-17)

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 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
270 Main St Ste A · (860) 343-3392 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
283 Main St · (860) 342-3390 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
316 Marlborough St · (860) 342-0672 · Call to confirm hours
Park
284 Brownstone Ave · (860) 342-6757 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
345 Main St · (860) 342-0458

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 increased22.8%18.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.6%6.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.6%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.1%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 injury1.6%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.7%16.4%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication8.5%17.6%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.0%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.0%4.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control29.6%24.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.3%17.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.0%69.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission15.1%24.3%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit4.3%10.7%12.0%better

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.

56.8% 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 133 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

56.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
14.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.46U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.26hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.0% 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 53 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 58% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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 SNF56.8%CMS range 48.1–63.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF14.3%CMS range 11.1–20.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge66.0%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 discharge75.5%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 discharge60.4%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 identified98.3%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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 stay1.7%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 hospitalization7.2%CMS range 4.1–11.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.871.02Oct 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

0.90
RN hours/ resident / day
0.56
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.37
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.83
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.67
RN hoursweekends
15.7%
Total nursing turnover
23.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 65 beds and averages 57.3 residents a day — about 88% 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 3.83 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.90 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.37 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.99 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.00 to 0.67 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 16% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-10)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-17)

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.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-17 · 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, review of facility documentation, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #18) who were reviewed for falls, the facility failed to utilize a gait belt during a transfer resulting in a major injury from a fall. The findings include: Resident #18's diagnosis included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, and history of falling. Review of the Resident Transfer Policy dated 6/14/22 directed that gait belts are used with all transfers unless contraindicated. A Fall Risk assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #18 was at a moderate risk of falling. Review of the Reportable Event dated 6/23/23 identified Resident #18 fell while being transferred back to bed with the assistance of Nursing Assistant #1 (NA#1). Review of the submitted conclusion summary, written by the DNS, dated 6/28/23 identified that the investigation led to conflicting information from staff, however, after all staff were interviewed it was determined that NA #1 had not followed…

    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 · E2026-03-10 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 (Residents #3, 33 and 12) reviewed for unnecessary medications, for Resident #3 and 33, the facility failed to ensure monthly pharmacy medication regimen reviews were completed for 5 of the 12 months reviewed and for 1 of 5 residents Resident #12 the facility failed to ensure monthly pharmacy medication reviews were completed 11 of 12 months. The findings include: 1. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses that included thrombophilia, severe dementia with mood disturbance, and hypothyroidism. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 had severely impaired cognition and was receiving antipsychotic, hypnotic, and anticoagulant medications. The care plan dated 3/10/26 identified Resident #3 was taking an anticoagulant medication, with interventions that included reviewing the medication list for adverse interactions and was taking an antipsychotic…

    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 before2026-03-10 · 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 observation, review of facility documentation, facility policies, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food service staff were wearing hair restraints while preparing food and failed to ensure a low temperature dishwasher was operating in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation. The findings include: 1. [NAME] #1 was hired in October 2012.Dietary Aide #1 was hired in November 2023.Observation on 3/8/26 at 9:00 AM, in the first-floor dining room, identified Dietary Aide #1, serving breakfast from the steam table, without the benefit of a hair guard.Interview with Dietary Aide #1 on 3/8/26 at 9:08 AM identified that she was aware that she should be wearing a hair net while serving food, but today she had arrived late and they were short staffed, so she forgot to put it on. Dietary Aide #1 indicated that she always wears a hair net.Observation on 3/9/26 at 11:40 AM identified [NAME] #1, in the kitchen, temping food on the steam table, without the benefit of a beard guard.Interview with [NAME] #1 on 3/9/26 at 11:40 AM identified that he always puts on a beard…

    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 · D2026-03-10 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of facility documentation and interviews the facility failed to ensure a clean and homelike environment. The findings include:Observation on 3/10/26 11:37 AM with the facility Administrator/Owner identified 3 of 4 upholstered chairs in the solarium (sitting room) and 5 of 10 upholstered chairs in the dining room were marked with heavy brown/black staining on the seat, and back of chairs.Interview with the Administrator on 3/10/26 11:37 AM identified he was aware the chairs were heavily soiled and had recently been researching replacements indicating they were costly. The Administrator further identified although his efforts were ongoing, he was unable to provide any documentation regarding progress towards replacement.Although requested, a policy on maintaining a clean homelike environment was not provided.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-10 · 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 policy and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #12) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a customized wheelchair was re-assessed for safe transfers after implementing a new standing mechanical lift and sling harness resulting in staff having to lower the resident on a firm surface near the floor. The findings include:Resident #12 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 with diagnoses that included morbid obesity and osteoarthritisPhysical Therapy Evaluation dated 6/24/25 identified Resident #12 was assessed with the use of a mechanical stand lift assist and was able to stand 1-3 minutes with total dependence.The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #12 was cognitively intact and required two person assist with transfers, utilized a motorized wheelchair for mobility and had not experienced any falls since admission.The care plan dated 9/23/25 identified Resident #12 was non ambulatory,…

    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 · Fcited before2024-06-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the tour of the Dietary Department, staff interview, and facility documentation, the facility failed to ensure open food items were dated, failed to ensure canned foods in the emergency stock were not expired, and failed to ensure food was served under sanitary conditions. The findings included: During a tour of the Dietary Department on 6/10/24 10:31 AM with the Dietary Director the following was identified: a. 2 ceiling fans directly over the prep area were noted to be oscillating with a heavy accumulation of dust. A dietary worker was cutting a cake directly under one of the fans. In addition, the ceiling fan in the dish room was noted with a heavy accumulation of dust. b. An uncovered pan of gravy and flour mixture was observed to be on top of the preparation (prep) table. The side and underneath area of the prep table were noted to have a heavy accumulation of dirt and debris. c. The pipes behind the conventional convection oven and the flooring behind the oven was observed with a heavy…

    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 · D2024-06-17 · 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, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for the only sampled resident (Resident #5) reviewed for oxygen use, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing was connected to the concentrator providing oxygen on 2 occasions. The findings include: Resident #5's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic diastolic heart failure, obstructive sleep apnea, and chronic pain syndrome. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 was severely cognitively impaired and required total assistance with bathing and dressing, set up assistance with eating, partial moderate assistance with bed mobility, and total assistance with transfers and mobility. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/3/24 identified oxygen therapy since 2019, chronic respiratory failure with long term oxygen use, choosing to remove oxygen and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Interventions included to remind to keep oxygen on, monitor for signs or…

    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 · D2024-06-17 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 facility policy for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #14) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to attempt a Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) for a psychotropic medication. The findings include: Resident #14 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of major depressive disorder and personal history of other mental and behavioral disorders. A physician order dated 1/25/23 directed the administration of Lexapro (an antidepressant medication) 20 milligrams daily. An admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #14 had intact cognition, was independent with eating, required supervision with oral hygiene, and partial to moderate staff assistance with transfers. Additionally, Resident #14 had a diagnosis of depression and received an antidepressant. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/1/23 identified Resident #14 was on an antidepressant, interventions included monitoring ongoing signs and symptoms of depression and monitoring side effects and effectiveness…

    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 · D2024-06-17 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolated
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    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 and interviews for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for the environment, the facility failed to maintain adequate temperatures for a resident refrigerator on the 2nd floor. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of anxiety, dysphagia, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Observation of resident rooms on 6/13/24 identified Resident #1's refrigerator tempeature guage read 50 degrees and the following foods were stored in the refrigerator, yogurt and leftover food from dining service. Additionally, the temperatures recorded on a log for June 2024 ranged between 48 and 50 degrees Fahrenheit (F) (normal at or below 41 degrees F). Interview with the Director of Maintenance on 6/13/24 at 11:00 AM identified the refrigerators belonged to the facility and that housekeeping was responsible to check the temperatures of the refrigerators. If the temperatures were out of range, the facility would replace the malfunctioning refrigerator with…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-04-14 · tag F0810 — isolated
    Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
    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 review, facility documentation review, and interviews for one of two dining rooms observed, the facility failed to ensure that adaptive dining equipment was in place for one observed resident (Resident #12) during a meal in accordance with the resident plan of care. The findings include: Resident #12's diagnoses included Alzheimer's Dementia, failure to thrive, Macular Degeneration and bilateral cataracts. Occupational Therapy treatment note dated 7/22/2021 directed use of a non-slip mat under dishes, a lip plate, and Nosey Cup for drinks, and noted orders were written for staff to provide feeding equipment at all meals. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #12 had moderate cognitive impairment and required supervision (oversight, encouragement, or cueing) with eating. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 1/18/2022 identified Resident #12 was at risk for weight loss due to dementia. Interventions directed use of a Nosey Cup or…

    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 · D2022-04-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the laundry room and linens were maintained in a clean manner. The findings include: Observations with RN #2 on 4/13/2022 at 2:03 PM in the facility laundry area, identified a heavy accumulation of white, fluffy debris on the laundry room walls, tops of the laundry machines, tops of the soap dispenser, water pipes, door hinges, ceiling, and on the top of a wall mounted heater. Strands of the white, fluffy debris were observed hanging downward approximately three (3) to six (6) inches from the ceiling and door closure arm. A large industrial-sized fan was observed located on a green plastic chair. The fan was observed to have a large accumulation of white, fluffy debris on the grill cover in front of the fan blades. The fan was turned on and blowing toward a hanging rack with clean clothing and linens and toward folded, clean laundry located on a multi-level linen cart with the protective cover left open, and clean blankets on a table next to the linen cart. Additional linens were observed on…

    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

“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

$10,033 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $10,033 — penalty dated 2024-06-17

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
YUSKA, GERALDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR100%since 11/25/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 1 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$8.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 61%Medicare 9%Other / private 30%

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

$390per resident / day
operating cost
$11,868per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$385per 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 075214. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-10, 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