River Glen Health Care Center

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.

63.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 517 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 56.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 241 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.57 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 86% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 110.6 residents a day — about 92% 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 3.71 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 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 3.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.88 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% is about the same as 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 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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2025-08-15 · 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 observation(s), review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #118) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to properly store medication and obtain a physician order with completion of a self administration assessment for a resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The findings include:Resident #118's diagnoses included COPD, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, emphysema, and pneumonia. A physician's order dated 7/16/25 directed Ventolin HFA (a bronchodilator used to treat asthma) aerosol solution 108mcg/act (Albuterol Sulfate HFA) 2 puffs inhaled orally every 4 hours as needed for shortness of breath.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #118 was cognitively intact and required partial/moderate assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. The MDS indicated Resident #118 was on continuous oxygen therapy.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/29/25 identified Resident #118…

  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 · D2025-08-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for the 1 of 32 sampled residents (Resident #2) reviewed for advanced directives, the facility failed to ensure advanced directives were consistent. The findings include:Resident #2's was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, acute respiratory failure with hypercapnia (retention of carbon dioxide) and chronic kidney disease. A State of Connecticut Department of Public Health transfer of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order form signed by the physician on [DATE] indicated Resident #2 had a valid DNR order which was written on [DATE] and was retained in the resident's medical record. A hospital discharge summary for Resident #2 dated [DATE] at 11:59 PM identified the discharge code status as do not resuscitate/do not intubate (DNR/DNI). An admission physician's order dated [DATE] indicated Resident #2 was a DNR. An Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) order written by APRN #2 dated [DATE] directed…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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 observations, review of the clinical record, interviews and facility policy for the only resident reviewed for communication/sensory (Resident #8), for 1 of 3 sampled resident (Resident #32) reviewed for pressure ulcers, for the only sampled resident reviewed for positioning (Resident #90), the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was in place for hearing (Resident #8), for refusals of care (Resident #32) and for functional limitation in range of motion (Resident #90). The findings include: 1.Resident #8 diagnoses included failure to thrive, heart failure, and osteoarthritis. A facility contracted audiology consult form dated 9/17/24 identified that Resident #8 had a right and left hearing aid from another company. The aids were cleaned for wax and debris and were functioning. Resident #8 declined to receive new hearing aids at that time. No follow up audiology consults were in the clinical record. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated of 5/22/25 identified Resident #8 was hard of hearing…

  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 · D2025-08-15 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  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 #15) reviewed for advance directives, the facility failed to update the resident care plan (RCP) for a resident with comfort measures only (CMO) and no intravenous hydration (IVs). The findings include:Resident #15 had diagnoses that included dementia, anemia, and hypertension.A Do Not Resuscitate Consent Form dated [DATE] identified do not resuscitate (DNR) was discussed with Resident #15's responsible party by the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) #4 and Resident #15's responsible party signed the form in agreement with changing Resident #15 to DNR.An APRN #4's progress note dated [DATE] at 11:53 AM identified Resident #15's code status/advance directives was changed by probate court on [DATE] from full code to DNR. The note further identified an order was in place for DNR and registered nurse may pronounce (RNP)(the RN may officially declare a resident deceased ).An APRN advance directives order dated…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-15 · 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 staff interviews, review of the clinical record and policy for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #131) reviewed for death, the facility failed to ensure the Registered Nurse Pronouncement was comprehensive to include a full assessment. The findings include:Resident #131's diagnoses included congestive heart failure, cerebral infarction, and hypertension.A Resident Care Plan dated 4/17/25 identified Resident #131 had a self-care deficit related to impaired mobility and incontinence. Interventions included to aid in bathing resident as needed and provide assistance with eating, dressing, grooming and oral care as needed.The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #131 was cognitively intact, required substantial maximal assistance for toileting, bathing, and transfers. Also, identifying Resident #131 required set up assistance for eating.A physician's order dated 6/22/25 directed Do Not Resuscitate (DNR), Register Nurse Pronouncement (RNP), and comfort measures only.Nursing…

  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 · D2025-08-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #87) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to provide supervision for a resident who required assistance of 1 with toileting and supervision with ambulation, resulting in a fall. The findings include: Resident #87 had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, macular degeneration, and hypertension.A Fall Risk Evaluation assessment dated [DATE] at 10:10 AM and completed by Registered Nurse (RN) #1 identified Resident #87 was at a high risk for falls related to poor recall, judgement, and safety awareness. Additionally, the Fall Risk Evaluation identified Resident #87 had 1-2 falls in the past 3 months. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 7/2/24 identified Resident #87 was at risk for falls related to medication side effects, history of falls, and deconditioning. Interventions included to transfer Resident #87 with contact guard assistance/ hand hold assistance and a rolling walker,…

  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 · D2025-08-15 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record review, interviews, and facility policy for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for a resident utilizing a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine nightly. The findings include: Resident #2's diagnoses included obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), acute respiratory failure with hypercapnia (retention of carbon dioxide) and asthma. A respiratory care evaluation form dated 7/17/25 identified Resident #2 had his/her own CPAP machine with a nasal mask at the bedside which the resident indicated he/she had worn on the prior night and to continue to observe and educate the resident with CPAP use. An Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) progress note dated 7/21/25 at 9:45 AM and written by APRN #2 identified Resident #2 had a history of obstructive sleep apnea, should be encouraged to use the CPAP machine during his/her skilled nursing facility (SNF) stay and the resident should be educated 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #15) reviewed for pressure ulcer/injury, the facility failed to ensure Resident #15 was placed on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for a Stage 3 pressure ulcer. The findings include:Resident #15 had diagnoses that included dementia, anemia, and hypertension.The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/28/25 identified Resident #15 was at risk for alteration in skin integrity related to impaired mobility, incontinence, shearing, friction, and cognition. Interventions included to observed skin condition with care daily and report abnormalities, and provide preventative skin care routinely and as needed. The RCP further identified Resident #15 had actual skin breakdown related to a stage 2 pressure injury on the right buttock. Interventions included administer treatment per physician orders, encourage and assist to turn and position as needed, and obtain wound consult as needed. The quarterly Minimum Data…

  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 · D2025-07-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  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, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from verbal mistreatment. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility during 6/2025 with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy and a history of falls. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six (6), indicating severely impaired cognition, had no behaviors and required maximal assistance with transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/13/2025 identified cognitive loss related to metabolic encephalopathy, and a risk for falls. Interventions directed to use simple words, reinforce the need to call for assistance, and to assist the resident with ADLs. Facility reportable event dated 6/16/2025 at 2 AM identified Resident #1 was confused, trying to get out of bed, and yelling out for his/her spouse, and the roommate…

  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 · D2025-07-07 · 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 record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from involuntary seclusion. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility during 6/2025 with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy and a history of falls. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six (6), indicating severely impaired cognition, had no behaviors and required maximal assistance with transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/13/2025 identified cognitive loss related to metabolic encephalopathy, and a risk for falls. Interventions directed to use simple words, reinforce the need to call for assistance, and to assist the resident with ADLs. Facility reportable event dated 6/16/2025 at 2 AM identified Resident #1 was confused, trying to get out of bed, and yelling out for his/her spouse, and 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance

“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 CAREONE — 37 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 9 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

This home reported $2.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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.

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