Lutheran Home Of Southbury Inc
990 North Main Street, Southbury, CT 06488 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (203) 264-9135 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0602, F0603) — most recent Dec 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 fell from 4 to 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 28.3% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.4% | 6.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.4% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.3% | 22.3% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.7% | 3.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 23.5% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.3% | 17.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.6% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.3% | 4.0% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.8% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.8% | 17.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.0% | 69.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.8% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.2% | 10.7% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.78 | 2.06 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.89 | 1.46 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
62.6% 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 212 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.8% 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 131 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 35% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 62.6%CMS range 54.8–69.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.5%CMS range 6.9–12.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 61.8% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 60.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 59.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 99.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 0.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.6%CMS range 5.2–11.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.93 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 116.2 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 4 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 4.25 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.64 is at or above 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.47 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
35 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 record review, facility documentation review, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to act timely when therapy recommended to change the resident transfer status. The findings include: Resident #1 had a diagnosis of altered mental status and dementia. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating moderately impaired cognition, had no behaviors and required partial assistance with transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/7/26 identified a risk for falls and self-care deficit. Interventions directed to ensure call light was within reach and provide assistance of two (2) with transfers with a rolling walker and ambulate with rehab only Physician order review failed to identify an order that directed transfer status. Facility Reportable Event (RE) dated 5/4/26 at 10:29 AM identified Resident #1 required assist of one (1) for transfers and had…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 record review, facility documentation review, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a resident with dementia who was known to require assistance with transfers and only able to ambulate with therapy, was transferred without injury. The findings include: Resident #1 had a diagnosis of altered mental status and dementia. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating moderately impaired cognition, had no behaviors and required partial assistance with transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/7/26 identified a risk for falls and self-care deficit. Interventions directed to ensure call light was within reach and provide assistance of two (2) with transfers with rolling walker and to ambulate only with rehab. Physician order review failed to identify an order directed transfer status. Facility Reportable Event (RE) dated 5/4/26 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-01 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for an allegation of misappropriation of resident property, the facility failed to safeguard a resident's personal valuables when Resident #1's cash money was removed from the facility's safe. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, depression, and anxiety disorder. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had poor decision-making skills regarding tasks of daily living and required assistance from staff with activities of daily living. The nursing progress note dated 9/4/25 at 7:35 PM identified a nurse aide brought Resident #1 to the shower room to give Resident #1 his/her weekly shower and the nurse aide found $20.00 dollars in cash in Resident #1's brief, and later in Resident #1's room the nurse aide found $340.00 dollars cash hidden in Resident #1's soiled bedding, along with three (3) checkbooks. The note…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-01 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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, policies, and interviews, for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #4) reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to ensure the receiving provider's acceptance prior to transfer and failed to provide the receiving health care facility with the resident's discharge summary before the resident's arrival.Resident #4 had diagnoses that included anoxic brain damage, dementia with behavioral disturbance, fracture of the upper end of the left humerus, atrial fibrillation, malignant neoplasm of the prostate, and dysphagia.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #4 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8), was frequently incontinent of bowel, occasionally incontinent of bladder, and required moderate assistance with personal hygiene, bed mobility, ambulation, and transfers. The MDS further identified Resident #4's goal for discharge was to be discharged to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #4) reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for discharge. The findings include:Resident #4 had diagnoses that included anoxic brain damage, dementia with behavioral disturbance, fracture of the upper end of the left humerus, atrial fibrillation, malignant neoplasm of the prostate, and dysphagia.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #4 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8), was frequently incontinent of bowel, occasionally incontinent of bladder, and required moderate assistance with personal hygiene, bed mobility, ambulation, and transfers. The MDS further identified Resident #4's goal for discharge was to be discharged to the community.The care plan dated 9/10/2025 identified Resident #4 wished to return to the community where he/she resided 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-06-17 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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, record and policy review, the facility failed to post and provide information or means to file a grievance and follow up on grievances. The findings included: 1. Resident #31's diagnoses included diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #31 was mildly cognitively impaired, required set up for eating and oral hygiene and substantial/maximal assistance for dressing and transfers. 2. Resident #57's diagnoses included emphysema, a pressure ulcer to the sacral area and irritable bowel syndrome. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #57 was cognitively intact, independent for eating and required partial/moderate assistance for dressing and transfers. 3. Resident #61's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression and anxiety. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #61 was…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-06-17 · tag F0603 — failed to not confine residents against their will — patternProtect 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
Based on observations and staff interviews for 30 residents reviewed for placement on a secured unit, the facility failed to identify required clinical criteria for placement on the unit, failed to develop a policy for the secured unit, and failed to document that information for independent egress had been provided to appropriate residents. The findings include: Observations on 6/9/25, 6/10/25, 6/11/25, 6/16/25, and 6/17/25 identified 30 residents resided on the lower level secured unit. Although entrance onto the unit did not require a code to enter, exit from any of the doors (including the door used to enter that unit) on the unit required input of a number code into a keypad adjacent to the door. Additionally, it was noted that if a number code was not entered, the handle to the door needed to be engaged (held down) for 15 seconds for the door to open, and if the handle was not held down for 15 seconds, an alarm would sound. Intermittent observations on all days of the survey identified staff entering the number code into the keypad for residents to exit the unit. Interview…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 4 of 4 residents (Resident #24, Resident #54, Resident #63, Resident #76) observed to be eating their meals in the hallway, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience. The findings include: 1. Resident #24's diagnoses included adjustment disorder, anxiety, and right sided weakness related to a cerebral vascular accident. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #24 was severely cognitively impaired, required maximal assistance for toileting, and bathing. Also identified Resident #24 required moderate assistance with eating, transfers and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/25/25 identified Resident #24 was at risk for nutritional problems with interventions that included to monitor intake and record every meal, and to provide and serve meals as ordered. Further identifying Resident #24 had a self-care deficit with interventions that included…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-17 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to notify the provider of a positive orthostatic blood pressure for a resident on a new antipsychotic medication. The findings include: Resident #64's diagnoses included dementia with agitation, anxiety, and hypertension. A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #64 was severely cognitively impaired, was receiving an antipsychotic medication, required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, was independent with bed mobility, and required supervision or touching assistance with chair/bed transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/24/25 identified Resident #64 used psychotropic medications related to behavior management, received antipsychotic medication and had a history of delusions. Interventions included administering anti-psychotic medications as ordered, monitor/document the side effects 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for one sample resident (Resident #24) reviewed for mistreatment, the facility failed to notify the State Agency in a timely manner of an injury of unknown origin. The findings include: Resident #24's diagnoses hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, heart disease, and hypertension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #24 was severely cognitively impaired, required maximal assistance for toileting, and bathing. Also identified Resident #24 required moderate assistance with eating, transfers and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 2/20/25 identified Resident #24 had cognitive dementia or impaired thought process related to a cerebral vascular accident (CVA) with interventions that included to provide Resident #24 with supervision and assistance with all decisions, and to use task segmentation to support…
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.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observations, interviews and record review for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #310) reviewed for positioning, the facility failed to offload heels for a resident at high risk for pressure ulcer development. The findings include: Resident #310's diagnoses included atrial fibrillation, essential hypertension and hearing loss. The admission Norton Scale Predicting Risk of Pressure Ulcer Assessment completed 5/30/25 identified Resident #310 was a high risk for pressure ulcer development. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/30/25 identified Resident #310 had the potential for pressure injury development related to incontinence, and decreased mobility. Interventions included to monitor dressing placement as ordered to ensure it was intact and adhering, educate the resident/family/caregivers as to causes of skin injury including repositioning/positioning requirements and offloading both feet with pillows while in bed starting at calves down to the heels. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE]…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 4 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to prevent a fall for a resident at risk for falls who required assistance with ambulation. The findings include: Resident #64's diagnoses included dementia with agitation, anxiety, and rheumatoid arthritis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #64 was severely cognitively impaired, required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, and supervision or touching assistance with transfers and ambulation. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #64 had no falls since admission. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect 1/29/25 identified Resident #64 was at risk for falls related to confusion, deconditioning, medications, decline in health on hospice, refusal of care at times, and Resident #64 was very self-determined to do what he/she wanted independently despite ongoing assistance. Interventions included…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-17 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 interview, facility documentation, and policy review for medication storage , the facility failed to ensure bi-monthly audits of controlled medications were completed. Review of the facilities bi-monthly narcotic audit sheets for [NAME], C1 South, C2 South, and C2 North medication carts identified they were not completed for May 2025 and June 2025. Interview and facility documentation review with the Director of Nurses (DNS) on 6/16/25 at 12:34 PM identified that the bi-monthly audits of controlled medications for [NAME], C1 South, C2 South, and C2 North medication carts were not completed for May 2025 and June 2025. It was identified that it was the responsibility of the DNS to ensure they were completed and although she knew they should be completed, she had forgotten to complete. Review of the Controlled Substance Storage facility policy and procedures by Woodmark Pharmacy, revised November 2011, identified that medications included in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) classification as…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-17 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for unnecessary medication, the facility failed to change or discontinue a psychotropic medication after extended nonuse of the medication, failed to document the duration and rationale for extension of an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication extended beyond 14 days. The findings include: Resident #64's diagnoses included dementia with agitation, anxiety, and left femur fracture repair. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #64 was severely cognitively impaired, received hospice care, had no physical or behavioral symptoms directed towards others (hitting, kicking, grabbing, screaming/cursing at others, threatening others), had no behavior symptoms not directed towards others (pacing, rummaging, screaming or hitting/scratching self), and was receiving an antianxiety medication. The MDS assessment further identified Resident #64 required setup 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-17 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide 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, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to provide adaptive equipment per the physician's order for a resident with dysphagia and malnutrition. The findings include: Resident #106's diagnosis included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), protein-calorie malnutrition, and dementia. An Occupational Therapy progress note dated 5/14/25 identified Resident #106 was observed for breakfast and lunch and was made an assist of 1 for feeding and required a blue covered mug with a straw for all meals. A physician's order dated 5/14/25 directed to provide a blue handled cup with lid and straw for all meals. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #106 was severely cognitively impaired and was dependent with transfers, toileting, eating and bed mobility. The MDS indicated Resident #106 required a mechanically altered and therapeutic diet. A Nutrition Assessment written by 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-05 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for behaviors, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified when the resident was restless and agitated. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbance and adjustment disorder with disturbance of conduct. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] at 9:13 A.M. completed by RN #7 identified for Resident #1 restraints were not being used. The functional abilities and goals assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 requires substantial assistance with ADLs and transfers, independent with bed mobility, and used a manual wheelchair. The initial social history assessment dated [DATE] at 2:25 P.M. identified Resident #1's family reports h/she has had increased confusion over the past few months. The social history assessment identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-05 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for restraints, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free of a physical restraint. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbance and adjustment disorder with disturbance of conduct. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] at 9:13 A.M. completed by RN #7 identified for Resident #1 restraints were not being used. The functional abilities and goals assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 requires substantial assistance with ADLs and transfers, independent with bed mobility, and uses a manual wheelchair. The initial social history assessment dated [DATE] at 2:25 P.M. identified Resident #1's family reports h/she has had increased confusion over the past few months. The social history assessment identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of two (2) indicative…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-23 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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, interviews and facility policy for one resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #1), the facility failed to ensure the resident was treated with dignity and respect. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbance, and anxiety. The RCP dated 8/13/2024 identified Resident #1 had impaired cognition, communication and impaired thought process due to dementia. Interventions directed to approach resident in a slower pace, and to stop and return if the resident was agitated or upset, when unable to redirect, have staff to sit with resident to provide emotional support, do not touch her/him, do not rush and report the behavior issues to the nurse. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had severely impaired cognition and was supervision for self-care, moderate assist for toileting, transfer and walk with a walker. Resident #1 was independent for bed mobility. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-23 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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, interviews and facility policy for one resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #1), the facility failed to ensure staff reported an allegation of abuse timely. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbance, and anxiety. The RCP dated 8/13/2024 identified Resident #1 had impaired cognition, communication and impaired thought process due to dementia. Interventions directed to approach resident in a slower pace, and to stop and return if the resident was agitated or upset, when unable to redirect, have staff to sit with resident to provide emotional support, do not touch her/him, do not rush and report the behavior issues to the nurse. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had severely impaired cognition and was supervision for self-care, moderate assist for toileting, transfer and walk with a walker. Resident #1 was independent for bed mobility. The facility…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, facility documentation review, interviews and facility policy review for one resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #1), the facility failed ensure care was provided in accordance with the plan of care. The findings include:. Resident #1 was admitted with diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbance, and anxiety. The RCP dated 8/13/2024 identified Resident #1 had impaired cognition, communication and impaired thought process due to dementia. Interventions directed to approach resident in a slower pace, and to stop and return if the resident was agitated or upset, when unable to redirect, have staff to sit with resident to provide emotional support, do not touch her/him, do not rush and report the behavior issues to the nurse. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had severely impaired cognition and was supervision for self-care, moderate assist for toileting, transfer and walk with a walker. Resident #1 was independent for bed mobility. Interview…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-29 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for change of condition, the facility failed to notify the resident representative when there was a change of condition and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #261) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to notify the physician when medication was not available for administration. The findings: 1. Resident #5 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included constipation, ulcerative colitis, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The care plan dated 5/11/23 identified Resident #5 had self-care deficits due to confusion. Interventions included to discuss with the resident and resident representative and any concerns related to loss of independence. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 had moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance with care. The nurse's note written by LPN #6 dated on 8/24/23 at 1:57 PM identified Resident #5…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-29 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #35) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to report an abuse allegation in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included COPD, epilepsy, and heart failure. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #35 had moderately impaired cognition and required limited assistance with one person for transfers and toilet use. The care plan dated 3/9/23 identified Resident #35 had impaired cognitive function or impaired thought processes presenting with forgetfulness. Interventions included to keep a consistent routine and provide consistent care givers, to decrease confusion. The FLIS Reportable Event Report dated 3/10/23 identified that on 3/8/23 at 6:00 PM, NA #1 reported hearing alleged verbal abuse from NA #2 directed to Resident #35. The local law enforcement agency, physician, and family were…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-29 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #35) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation of an abuse allegation. The findings include: Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included COPD, epilepsy, and heart failure. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #35 had moderately impaired cognition and required limited assistance with one person for transfers and toilet use. The care plan dated 3/9/23 identified Resident #35 had impaired cognitive function or impaired thought processes presenting with forgetfulness. Interventions included to keep a consistent routine and provide consistent care givers, to decrease confusion. The FLIS Reportable Event Report dated 3/10/23 identified that on 3/8/23 at 6:00 PM, NA #1 reported hearing alleged verbal abuse from NA #2 directed to Resident #35. The local law enforcement agency, physician, and family…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 resident's (Resident #7) reviewed for care planning, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was in place. The findings: Resident #107 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included protein-calorie malnutrition, hyperlipidemia, and anemia. A physician's order dated 7/9/23 directed a regular diet with thin liquids. The care plan dated 7/9/23 identified desirable weight loss. Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #107's usual weight was 120 lbs., and current weight was 104 lbs. Resident on Glucerna 120 ml twice a day and has a 5.0 lb. weight loss since admission possibly due to edema post op left hip ORIF from fall at home. A physician's progress note dated 7/14/23 indicated the resident had suboptimal intake and complaints of poor appetite. Weight was 104.2 lbs. Plan to start Glucerna and obtain labs. A physician's order dated 7/14/23 directed to give Glucerna 120…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-29 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #261) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice by verifying the identity of the resident before administering medication. The findings: Resident #261 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included osteoporosis with pathological fracture and pubic ramus fracture, (TIA) transient ischemic attack, cerebral infarction, and neoplasm of the brain. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #261 had intact cognition, required extensive assistance with care, had pain frequently and received scheduled and as needed pain medications 7 days a week. Medication observation with LPN #1 on 8/28/23 at 8:00 AM for Resident #261 identified LPN #1 prepared Oxycodone, Lactulose, Nadolol, MiraLAX, Senna Plus, Letrozole, Dexamethasone, and Aspirin for administration to Resident #261. LPN #1 knocked on the semi-private room door…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for change of condition, the facility failed to do an RN assessment with a change in condition and for 1 resident (Resident #78 ) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to follow physicians orders for daily weights and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #261) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to administer medication per physicians order. The findings: 1. Resident #5 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included constipation, ulcerative colitis, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The care plan dated 5/11/23 identified Resident #5 had self-care deficits due to confusion. Interventions included to discuss with the resident and resident representative and any concerns related to loss of independence. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #5 had moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance with care. The nurse's note…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #6 and 263) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing and humidifier canisters were changed weekly and dated, and that a sign that oxygen was in use was posted on the resident's doors per policy. The findings: 1. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy and pneumonia. The physician's progress note dated 7/26/23 indicated Resident #6 had been sent to the hospital for lethargy and fever and was diagnosed with acute metabolic encephalopathy secondary to viral/bacterial pneumonia with acute hypoxia. Resident #6 has returned to the facility. A physician's order dated 7/30/23 directed to apply oxygen via nasal cannula titrate to keep saturation level above or equal to 93% every shift. A physician's order dated 8/10/23 directed to apply oxygen via nasal cannula 1 - 3 liters for comfort as needed. 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.
- Potential for harm · E2021-07-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interview for 2 of 3 medication storage rooms, the facility failed to maintain the rooms in a secure manner and according to policy. The findings include: Observation on 7/18/21 at 5:15 AM identified the C-2 North unit and C-2 South unit's medication rooms were open/unsecured. The C-2 North's medication room door was propped completely open with a wedge. NA #1 was noted near the Nurse's station at that time and LPN #1 was noted halfway down the C-2 North's hallway. RN #2 was noted off C-2 South unit in adjacent hallway. Subsequent observation of C-2 South's medication room with RN #1 identified the medication room was unlocked and slightly open. Interview with LPN #2 on 7/18/21 at 5:27 AM identified that although the medication room should be closed at all times for resident safety, she forgot to close it. Interview with RN #2 on 7/18/21 at 5:35 AM identified that the door was not secured because she was preparing to administer narcotic medications and that it was her usual practice to keep it locked. Review…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2021-07-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 policy and interviews the facility failed to wear hair restraints while in the kitchen. The findings include: Observation on 7/18/21 at 7:05 AM identified there were 3 Dietary Aides (DA) and 1 cook in the kitchen. DA #1 had facial hair on the sides of his face, chin and neck. DA #1 was washing dishes in the kitchen while wearing a surgical mask but was without the benefit of a beard restraint. DA #2 was in the kitchen wearing a baseball cap but had hair covering his ears and around the back of his neck to top of the collar of the shirt and was without the benefit of a hair net. Interview with DA #1 on 7/18/21 at 7:10 AM indicted he started working in dietary a month ago and no one educated him or had given him a beard guard. DA #1 indicated the facial hair was at least 1 inch in length. Interview with DA #2 on 7/18/21 at 9:00 AM indicated he had been educated to wear a hair net with the baseball cap but forgot to put one on today. Interview with the Director of Dietary on 7/18/21 at 12:00 PM indicated she had not educated DA #1 about wearing…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-20 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #24) reviewed for edeka, the facility failed to notify the physician when the resident refused an ordered treatment. The findings include: Resident #24 was admitted to the facility in August 2020 with diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbances and intracranial hypertension. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #24 had severely impaired cognition, was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder and required supervision with walking in the hallway, and dressing, including putting on and removing ted stocking (extensive assistance with one person). Review of an APRN progress note, written by (APRN #1) dated 7/15/21 identified Resident #24 had peripheral edema, likely due to ace inhibitor, with no acute cardiopulmonary decompensation. The note indicated orders were written that included to give Lasix 20mg, one dose now, apply ted stockings to both…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #24) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to provide treatment for lower extremity edema. The findings include: Resident #24 was admitted to the facility in August 2020 with diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbances and intracranial hypertension. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #24 had severely impaired cognition, was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder and required supervision with walking in the hallway, and dressing, including putting on and removing ted stocking (extensive assistance with one person). Review of an APRN progress note, written by (APRN #1) dated 7/15/21 identified Resident #24 had peripheral edema, likely due to ace inhibitor, with no acute cardiopulmonary decompensation. The note indicated orders were written that included to give Lasix 20mg, one dose now, apply ted stockings to both lower extremities (apply in morning 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation facility policy and interviews for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #37) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to implement measures as documented in the plan of care to prevent falls. The findings include: Resident #37 was admitted to the facility in August 2020 with diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbances and anxiety. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #37 had moderately impaired cognition and required no assistance with activities of daily living. The care plan dated 5/8/21 identified Resident #37 was at risk for falls. Interventions included to place bright colored tape on the call light to encourage its use and reminder signs in Resident #37's room to call for assistance and to take/use walker placed close to resident. Observation on 7/18/21 at 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM and on 7/19/21 at 10:20 and 12:59 PM identified the call bell was without the benefit of the bright colored tape and the resident's…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2021-07-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 observation, review of facility documentation and interview the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control related to hand washing. The findings include: 1. Observation on 7/18/21 at 5:57 AM on C-2 North unit identified NA #3, preparing to provide morning care, was noted to wet towelettes, located on the linen cart with blue colored peri-wash, donned gloves, removed a wet towelette and a dry one and then proceeded into Resident #64's bedroom. NA #3 provided incontinent care to Resident 64, who had just had a bowel movement. Subsequently, NA #3 picked up the soiled materials with both gloved hands, left the room, and walked in the hallway to the soiled hampers. NA #3 opened the lid to the soiled hamper and disposed of the materials, removed her gloves and put on a new pair without the benefit of washing her hands. NA #3 proceeded to Resident #67's bedroom, provided incontinent care and without the benefit of handwashing, changed gloves, picked up soiled materials and walked out of 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.
- Potential for harm · D2021-07-20 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #24), reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to obtain Pneumococcal and Prevnar 13 vaccination history and failed to administer the Prevnar 13 vaccine. The findings include: Resident #24 was admitted to the on 8/5/20 with diagnoses included dementia and dysphagia and no known allergies. Review of an undated vaccination consent form, signed by the resident's representative did not identify yes or no for consent, or identify if the resident had already received a vaccination for Influenza, Pneumonia, or Prevnar 13. Additionally, the form had a note recommending checking with the community pharmacy. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #24 had severely impaired cognition and had no information for pneumococcal vaccination status. Review of a vaccination consent form dated 3/5/21, signed by the resident's representative, consented to have Resident #24 receive…
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.
- No harm found · B2023-08-29 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews the facility failed to conduct annual performance evaluations for 3 of 3 nurse aides. The findings include: Interview and review of employee files with the Director of Human Resources (HR) on 8/29/23 at 12:40 PM identified the following employees had not had an annual performance evaluation: NA #1, NA #2, and NA #3. The Director of HR identified that annual employee performance evaluations were not completed in 2022. The Director of HR further identified that she began working at the facility in November of 2022, and as soon as she identified that the annual performance evaluations had not been completed, she notified the DNS and Administrator. Interview with the DNS on 8/29/23 at 12:47 PM identified that nurse aides are to have a performance evaluation completed annually. The DNS indicated that she had begun working at the facility in August of 2022, and she wasn't aware that the annual evaluations had not been completed until December of 2022. Subsequently, the DNS completed all nurse aide performance…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BARTHOLOMEW, ALEXANDER | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2024 |
| BROWNE, TARA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| COWLAGI, ASHISH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2024 |
| GOODMAN, ROSS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2013 |
| MAYO, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2014 |
| ROBERTSON, KEITH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2024 |
| BOVILL, ANGELA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/02/2025 |
| HANSCOM, KRISTIN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| ONEAL, GARY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| RUSSO, NICHOLAS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/02/2025 |
| TAPPAN, CHRISTINE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| ASCENTRIA CARE ALLIANCE INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/08/2015 |
| BAROODY, ZIAD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| KHAN, GHULAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner 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.
This home reported $979K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CT
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.
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 075371. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-17, 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.