Sharon Center For Health & Rehabilitation

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

59.1% 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 130 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 61.9% 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 42 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 29% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 79.4 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 9 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 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.75 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.95 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.67 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.60 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

35 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-04-27 · 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 staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards and supervision, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision of a resident with moderate cognitive impairment and an unsteady gait requiring walker-assisted ambulation, failed to accurately assess elopement risk despite a BIMS score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and failed to ensure staff responded appropriately to an activated exit door alarm by searching for a resident or notifying the supervisor prior to deactivation. On 3/30/2026, Resident #1 exited the facility undetected, walked 0.3 miles on a two-way street without sidewalks or a crosswalk to the hospital emergency department, and remained unaccounted for by staff for one hour and 45 minutes. Resident #1 was on Apixaban (a blood thinner increasing the risk of serious bleeding from falls or trauma), was confirmed by the hospital to be confused and…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-29 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to review and respond to pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, diabetes, and hypertension.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, dependent on bathing, and personal hygiene. Also, identified Resident #1 required maximal assistance for toileting, dressing and partial moderate assistance for transfers. Further, identifying Resident #1 required set-up assistance for eating.A physician order dated 11/13/24 directed to administer Rexulti (an antipsychotic medication used to treat agitation associated with dementia) 0.5 milligram (mg) tablet every evening.A pharmacy medication review dated 12/6/24 recommended since Resident #1 was started…

  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 · E2025-08-29 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — pattern
  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

  Based on observations, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the correct portion of chicken was served, and corn bread or a similar substitute was provided per facility menu. The findings include: Observation of the lunch menu for 8/25/25 identified 4 oz of chicken and cornbread was to be served.a. Observations in the [NAME] Unit dining room on 8/25/25 at 12:15 PM noted that Resident #13 did not have any protein with his/her lunch meal. Resident #13 was asked if he/she wanted any chicken with lunch by the surveyor. Resident #13 responded that he/she would like chicken. Dietary Aid (DA) #1 responded, we don't have any more chicken. DA #1 did not offer an alternative and/or provide Resident #13 with any protein with his/her meal. Further observation on 8/25/25 at 12:30 PM in the [NAME] Wing dining room noted that 7 small chicken legs were served to residents out of the 11 residents in the [NAME] Wing dining room. Two residents were served an alternative (sandwich) and 2 residents had puree consistency meal. Resident #19 who was in…

  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 · Ecited before2025-08-29 · 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 observations, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #1, Resident #34 and Resident #54) reviewed for infection control, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control techniques regarding social distancing (Resident #1 and Resident #34) and Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) when entering a room of a resident on droplet precautions (Resident #54). The findings include: 1.Resident #1 had diagnoses that included COVID-19, dementia, and diabetes. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, used a walker, required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, was independent with bed/chair transfers, and required supervision or touching assistance with walking. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 8/23/25 identified Resident #1 was confirmed to have COVID-19 virus. Interventions included to assist Resident #1 with application of face mask as needed and place Resident #1 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
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-29 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  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 and facility policy for 1 of 2 sampled residents observed with medication at the bedside (Resident #50), the facility failed to ensure Resident #50 was assessed and had a physician order to self-administer medication. The findings include: Resident #50's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).A physician's order dated 3/25/24 and currently in effect directed ProAir HFA (a bronchodilator used to treat asthma) aerosol solution 108 micrograms (mcg)/act 2 puffs inhaled orally every 6 hours for shortness of breath.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 1/9/25 identified that Resident #50 had an altered respiratory status/difficulty breathing related to COPD. Interventions included administering medications per the physician's order and monitoring for effectiveness/side effects.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #50 was cognitively intact and independent with bed mobility, transfers, and toileting.On 8/26/25 at…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-29 · tag F0603 — failed to not confine residents against their will — isolated
  Protect each resident from separation (from other residents, his/her room, or confinement to his/her room).
  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 clinical records, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for wounds, the facility failed to ensure Resident #46 was placed on the correct precautions to prevent Resident #46 from being confined to his/her room. The findings include: Resident #46's diagnoses included non-pressure chronic ulcer of right foot with unspecified severity and Type 2 diabetes. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #46 was cognitively intact and required moderate assistance of 1 staff member with activities of daily living.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/22/25 identified Resident #46 was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for wounds and indwelling medical devices (intravenous catheter). Interventions included applying personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing high contact care activities.A physician's order dated 8/12/25 directed to apply Mupriocin external ointment (a topical antibiotic used to treat bacterial…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-29 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and facility policy for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #48) observed with medication at the bedside, the facility failed to ensure licensed staff followed standards of practice for medication administration and remained with the resident until medication was consumed. The findings include: Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation. A physician's order date 8/14/25 directed to administer Metoprolol Tartrate 12.5 mg (milligrams) two times a day for blood pressure, Spironolactone 25 mg once a day for heart failure, Isosorbide Mononitrate ER (extended release) 30 mg one a day for blood pressure, Lorestan Potassium 25 mg two times a day for blood pressure and Aspirin 81 mg in the morning for surgical aftercare.A Resident Care Plan dated 8/17/25 did not reflect that Resident #48 may self-administer medication and/or had been assessed for self-administration of medications.The…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for pressure ulcer/injury, the facility failed to obtain a timely nutritional evaluation for a resident with a new and worsening wound. The findings include: Resident #10 had diagnoses that included epilepsy (seizure disorder), dementia, and leukoencephalopathy (brain disease that damages the white matter which is responsible for communication between different brain regions).The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #10 was moderately cognitively impaired, at risk for developing pressure ulcer/injury, and was dependent for eating, bed mobility, and transfers.A physician order dated 4/1/25 directed to provide Thrive ice cream (protein rich ice cream) 2 times a day with lunch and dinner for weight loss related to variable oral intake.A Nutritional Evaluation written by Dietician #1 on 4/1/25 at 1:40 PM identified Resident #10 met 51 percent (%) to75% of his/her…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-29 · 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 Top of FormBased on observations, clinical record review, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for the only sampled resident reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #85), the facility failed to follow a physician's order for oxygen administration and failed to ensure oxygen was administered to a resident on continuous oxygen with a diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The findings include: Top of FormResident #85's diagnoses included COPD, dependence on supplemental oxygen (O2), and shortness of breath (SOB). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #85 was cognitively intact and required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and full assistance with toileting and transfers. The MDS also indicated Resident #85 had a diagnosis of COPD and was dependent on supplemental O2. A Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/27/25 identified Resident #85 had the potential for alteration in respiratory status related to…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-07 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated in a respectful and dignified manner. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included anxiety, tobacco use, and moderate dementia with psychotic disturbance. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) indicative of intact cognition, without the presence of behaviors, continent of bowel and bladder, independent with ADLs and ambulation. The care plan dated 12/10/24 identified Resident #1 is a current smoker with interventions that directed cigarettes and/or lighting material to be given by nursing at the designated times. The physician's orders dated 12/19/24 directed Resident #1 is permitted to smoke during designated smoking times only. Review of the facility's reportable event form dated 1/17/25 at 7:35…

  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 · D2024-08-20 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of two residents (Resident #2) reviewed for quality of care, the facility failed to honor a resident's advance directives following a change in condition. The findings include: Resident #2's diagnoses included dementia with psychotic disturbances, atrial fibrillation, and malignant neoplasm of prostate. Record review identified Person #1 was Resident #2's court appointed Conservator (COP) for health care decisions. Physician orders dated [DATE] directed Resident #1's code status was a full code. Resident #1 to receive CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had an established advance directive and wished to receive CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Interventions directed to review advance directives with resident and/or healthcare decision maker quarterly, and support the resident's decision for CPR. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS)…

  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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES — 42 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 26 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

16 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CT