Southington 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.

59.3% 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 314 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 71.4% 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 140 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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 130 beds and averages 124.8 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.13 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.72 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 4.18 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.94 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.30 to 0.70 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-02 · 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 review of facility documentation, Legionella water testing records, facility policies, and staff interviews reviewed for infection control, the facility failed to implement an effective Legionella water management monitoring program following repeated positive Legionella test results. Specifically, the facility continued monthly environmental testing despite ongoing positive findings from February 2026 through June 2026 and did not follow the post-remediation testing intervals recommended by the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) guidance. The findings include:Review of Legionella water testing records revealed monthly environmental testing was conducted from December 2025 through June 2026. Documentation for January 2026 testing was not available; facility staff reported the sample was lost due to a shipping error. Review further identified multiple positive Legionella results during the review period, including:On 2/24/26, the bathroom sink in room [ROOM NUMBER] tested…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-03 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect 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 missing personal property, the facility failed to protect a resident from misappropriation of property when Resident #1's credit card was removed from the resident's wallet by a staff member and used to make unauthorized purchases. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, multiple rib fractures, and muscle weakness. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had some short and long-term memory recall deficits. The Facility Reported Incident form dated 9/29/25 identified Resident #1's family member reported to the facility unknown charges appeared on Resident #1's credit card statement for purchases made out in the community, which were not made by Resident #1 nor made on behalf of Resident #1. The investigation identified Resident #1's credit card was missing from Resident #1's wallet, which was stored in a…

  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 · Ecited before2024-05-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 sampled resident (Resident #27) observed on tour, the facility failed to properly store bed pans and for 6 of 6 residents (Resident #30, Resident #68, Resident #77, Resident #111, Resident #118, and Resident #675) reviewed for Infection Prevention, the facility failed to appropriately implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) and The findings include: 1. Resident #27's diagnosis included congestive heart failure, dementia, and hypertension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #27 was moderately cognitively impaired and was dependent with personal hygiene, bathing, transfers, toileting, required substantial maximal assist with oral hygiene and independent with eating. Observation on 4/29/24 at 3:18 PM identified a bed pan was noted to be uncovered, not labeled, on the floor, beside the toilet of Resident #27's bathroom. A second observation on 4/30/24 at 9:22 AM with RN #1…

  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 · D2024-05-09 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately 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 the interviews, observations, facility policy, and record review for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #27) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to report a weight gain of 3 pounds or more in 24 hours as directed by the physician, and for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #626), reviewed for fluid restrictions, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified when the resident exceeded the daily fluid restriction. The findings include: 1) Resident #27's diagnosis included congestive heart failure, dementia, and hypertension. Physician orders dated 10/6/23 through 5/2/24 directed to obtain a weight daily and to notify the physician with a 3 pound (lb) weight gain in 1 day or a 5 lb weight gain in 1 week. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #27 was moderately cognitively impaired and was dependent with personal hygiene, bathing and toileting. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #27 required set up assist for oral hygiene and 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-05-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the interviews, observations, facility policy, and record review for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #27) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to obtain daily weights as per physician orders. The findings include: Resident #27's diagnosis included congestive heart failure, dementia, and hypertension. Physician orders dated 10/6/23 through 5/2/24 directed to obtain a weight daily and to notify the physician with a 3 pound (lb) weight gain in 1 day or a 5 lb weight gain in 1 week. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #27 was moderately cognitively impaired and was dependent with personal hygiene, bathing and toileting. Additionally, the MDS identified Resident #27 required set up assist for oral hygiene and was independent with eating. The Resident Care Plan dated 1/10/24 indicated Resident #27 was at risk for cardiopulmonary compromise related congestive heart failure. Interventions included to monitor daily weights, report a weight gain of 3 lbs in 24…

  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 · E2021-10-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
  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, review of the clinical record, review of facility policy, and interviews for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #57, #91 and #255) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure acceptable infection control practices were implemented regarding care of oxygen tubing, nasal cannulas, and a respiratory mouthpiece. The findings include: 1. Resident #57's diagnoses included infection of stoma of urinary tract, pneumonia, sick sinus syndrome, arteriosclerotic heart disease, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, atrial fibrillation and muscle weakness. A physician's order dated 8/3/21 directed to provide oxygen 2 liters via nasal cannula, titrate to keep oxygen saturation at 90% or higher every, monitor every shift as needed. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #57 had severe cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, toileting personal hygiene and was totally dependent for transfers. The care plan dated 9/8/21…

  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 · Ecited before2019-04-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #8), the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed when storing respiratory equipment and/or review of the Infection Control Program, failed to ensure a resident Line List was completed in it's entirety for 2 facility outbreaks The findings include: 1. Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, atherosclerotic heart disease and hypertension. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #8 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assist of one person with personal care. The care plan dated 4/7/19 identified Resident #8 had an upper respiratory infection with interventions that included to administration of medications as ordered. The physician's orders dated 4/8/19 directed Ipratropium-Albuterol solution for nebulization; 0.5milligrams (mg)-3mg (2.5mg…

  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 · D2019-04-11 · 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, clinical record review, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #112), the facility failed to assess Resident #112 for self-administration of medications. The findings include: Resident #112 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a fracture of the left arm, muscle weakness, and glaucoma. A physician order dated 1/22/19 directed to administer one drop of Cosopt drops to each eye twice a day. The 14-day Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #112 had no cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance of one person for dressing and personal hygiene. Observation on 4/8/19 at 11:50 AM with Registered Nurse (RN) #6 identified Dorzolamide HCL-Timolol (Cosopt) eye drops not secured and located on Resident #112's bedside table. Interview with Resident #112 on 4/8/19 at 11:50 AM identified the eye drops are on the bedside table because Resident #112 likes to self-administer his/her…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2019-04-11 · 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 observation, interview, review of the clinical record and facility policies for 2 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for advanced directives (Resident #30 and Resident #51), the facility failed to ensure the advanced directives were comprehensive and addressed in a timely manner and/or with the resident's representative. The findings include: 1. Resident # 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included vascular dementia, atherosclerotic heart disease and hypothyroidism. The faciliy CPR/DNR Discussion form dated [DATE] and signed by Resident #30 identified a code status of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). A notation noted on [DATE] the Power Of Attorney (POA) needs to sign the CPR/DNR form because Resident #30 was confused at times. (A Durable Power of Attorney form dated [DATE] and signed by Resident #30 directed medical decisions to be made by Person #4 in the event she/he was no longer able to). A physician order dated [DATE] directed a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) code status for Resident…

  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 · D2019-04-11 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #118), the facility failed to follow physician orders for offloading heels. The findings include: Resident #118 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included displaced intertrochanteric fracture of the left femur, diabetes mellitus II and dementia without behavioral disturbance. The admission nurses note dated 3/21/19 at 2:30 PM identified Resident #118 was admitted to the facility status post left hip fracture repair with 2 incisions. The nurses note further identified Resident #118 was noted with a deep tissue injury to the left heel. The physician's order dated 3/21/19 identified to keep left heel elevated off of the bed at all times, cleanse the left lateral heel Suspected Deep Tissue Injury (SDIT) with saline, followed by medi-honey, foam dressing, every three days and check heel dressing every shift. The care plan dated 3/22/19 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.

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 $3.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CT