Lord Chamberlain Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Ce
7003 Main Street, Stratford, CT 06614 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (203) 375-5894 Medicare only — no Medicaid
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,069 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-27)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 71.6% | 69.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 33.5% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.2% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
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.
64.8% 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 477 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 38.6% 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 145 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 1.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 36% 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 | 64.8%CMS range 60.6–69.0 | 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 | 13.3%CMS range 10.9–15.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 38.6% | 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 | 49.7% | 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 | 35.9% | 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 | 99.6% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 2.1% | 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 | 8.3%CMS range 5.6–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.83 | 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 60 beds and averages 47.4 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 13 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 5.54 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.30 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.57 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 4.93 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.78 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.48 to 0.83 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-09-23 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication errors, the facility failed to ensure Coumadin therapy to adequately maintain INR levels as ordered, failed to monitor the INR levels timely, and failed to act on the INR results timely in accordance with physician orders. The failures resulted in a finding of Immediate Jeopardy. The finding includes: The Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] directed Coumadin (Warfarin) (anticoagulant, used to prevent blood clots), 4 milligrams (mg) daily and to maintain an International Normalized Ratio (INR, blood test to measure how long blood takes to clot, used to monitor the effectiveness Coumadin) between 2.5 and 3.5. Further, the Summary directed to monitor INR every other day and adjust Coumadin dose if needed.Record review identified Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Resident #1's diagnoses included cerebral infarct with hemiplegia/hemiparesis…
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 · D2026-04-20 · 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 record review, facility documentation review, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #2) reviewed for discharge planning, the facility failed to ensure the resident was discharged with home care services. The findings include: Resident #2 had a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure and septic shock (infection). admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 indicating an intact cognition and required maximal assistance with toileting and transfers. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 9/20/22 identified Resident #2 required assistance with ADLs. Interventions directed to provide an assistance as indicated. Facility Discharge summary dated [DATE] at 1:53 PM identified Resident #2 was being discharged from the facility and will receive skilled services. The form indicated a referral was made, requesting nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and home health aide service. Nursing note dated 11/10/22 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 · D2025-09-23 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for two residents (Resident #1 and #2) reviewed for medication error, the facility failed to include anticoagulation therapy in the resident care plan timely for a resident on Coumadin. The findings include1. Resident #1's hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] directed Coumadin (Warfarin) (anticoagulant, used to prevent blood clots), 4 milligrams (mg) daily and to maintain an International Normalized Ratio (INR, blood test to measure how long blood takes to clot, used to monitor the effectiveness Coumadin) between 2.5 and 3.5. Further, the Summary directed to monitor INR every other day and adjust Coumadin dose if needed. Record review identified Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral infarct with hemiplegia/hemiparesis (paralysis/weakness) affecting the right dominant side, atrial fibrillation (rapid irregular heartbeat), and antiphospholipid syndrome…
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 before2025-09-23 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three (Resident #2) reviewed for medication error, the facility failed to ensure Coumadin was administered to maintain the INR in accordance with physician orders. The findings include: Review of the Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] directed Coumadin (anticoagulant used to prevent blood clots), 4 milligrams (mg) daily for six (6) days, and take 5 mg, once a week, on Thursdays. Further the Summary directed an International Normalized Ratio ((INR, blood test to measure how long blood takes to clot, used to monitor the effectiveness Coumadin) goal to be maintained between 2.0 and 3.0. Resident #2's diagnoses included atrial fibrillation and transient ischemic attack (TIA). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen out of fifteen (15/15), indicative of intact cognition, and received an…
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 before2025-08-27 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record and facility documentation, and interviews for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure a resident identified at risk for elopement did not leave the facility without staff knowledge. The findings include: Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and interviews for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure a resident identified at risk for elopement did not leave the facility without staff knowledge. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with a diagnoses of a left femur fracture. Record review identified Resident #1 was self-responsible, and Person #1 was the emergency contact. The Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] (Friday) identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented, was discharged with planned short term rehab admission, and Resident #1 understood…
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 before2025-06-11 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified timely of an increase in agitation. The findings include: Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 presented to the emergency department from home on 5/21/2025 after a fall. During hospitalization, Resident #1 was identified as a fall risk, with interventions that included a bed alarm, chair alarm, and bilateral wrist restraints required. Resident #1 had diagnoses that included dementia with behavioral disturbance and a history of falls. Fall risk dated 5/25/2025 at 1:48 PM identified a history of one (1) to two (2) falls in the last 3 months. Resident #1 received a score of nineteen (19), indicative of a high fall risk. Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] at 3:35 PM identified Resident #1 was confused and disoriented, and had behaviors that included intermittent sleeping…
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 before2025-04-03 · 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
Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for respiratory services, the facility failed to ensure that the medical provider was notified timely of a change in condition. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), sleep apnea, chronic cellulitis, morbid obesity and congestive heart failure. The nursing admission form dated 2/20/2025 identified Resident #1 was alert and oriented, experienced shortness of breath or trouble breathing with exertion, and was on two (2) liters (L) of oxygen (O2) through a nasal and a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) device. Resident #1 had an unstageable pressure injury on the coccyx that measured 12 centimeters (cm) in length by 14 cm in width, had extremity weakness, and used a wheelchair. A 48-hour discharge planning meeting form dated 2/20/2025 identified Resident #1 required a Hoyer (mechanical) lift transfer with an assist of two (2) staff. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-23 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
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 (Resident #1) reviewed for hospital transfer, the facility failed readmit a resident to the facility following hospitalization. The findings include: Resident #1 had a diagnosis of abdominal wound due to intestinal perforation and small bowel obstruction. Physician order dated 12/12/2024 directed cleanse abdominal wound with normal saline followed by soaked acetic acid kerlix to midline followed by ABD pad two times a day. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (indicated alert and oriented) and had a surgical wound. The Resident Care Plan RCP dated 12/26/2024 identified a surgical wound. Interventions directed to provide wound care per treatment order. Nurse Practitioner #2 wound note dated 12/30/2024 identified a consultation was provided for evaluation and management of the abdominal surgical wound. The wound measured 14 by 4.5 by…
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 · Ecited before2024-10-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #326) reviewed for infection control, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for a resident with a gastrostomy (feeding) tube and a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC). The findings include: Resident #326's diagnoses included severe sepsis with septic shock, infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal orthopedic prosthetic device and elevated white blood cell count. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #326 was cognitively intact and required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and transfers and was dependent with toileting. The MDS assessment also indicated major orthopedic surgery, a feeding tube, an antibiotic and intravenous (IV) medications/access. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/22/24 identified IV therapy and a feeding tube. Interventions included to change IV…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 observations, review of facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #374) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was treated with dignity when requesting wheel chair foot rests/pedals. The findings include: Resident #374's diagnoses included acquired absence of left leg below knee, generalized muscle weakness, end stage renal disease, and hypertension. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #374 was alert and oriented but forgetful and required a wheel chair for mobility. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 10/18/24 identified Resident #374 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Interventions included to provide assistance with bathing, dressing, hygiene, ambulation and transfers. Additionally, Resident #374 required physical therapy and occupational therapy as ordered. Observation on 10/25/24 at 9:40 AM identified Resident #374 in the hallway, sitting in wheelchair without leg rests/pedals applied…
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 · D2024-10-25 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each 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, staff interviews, review of clinical records, and facility policy for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #525) reviewed for environment, the facility failed to provide a call bell that accommodated Resident #525's physical limitation needs. The findings include: Resident #525's diagnoses included a fracture of the right femur, history of falling, and muscle weakness. A Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Ulcer Risk Evaluation dated 10/14/24 identified that Resident #525 walked occasionally, had no limitations, and made major and frequent changes in position. The admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #525 was alert and oriented to person, place, and time. The Baseline Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 10/16/24 identified Resident #525 was at risk for falls and had a fracture of the hip. Interventions included the use of his/her call bell when assistance was needed. An interview with Person #2 on 10/21/24 at 12:37 PM identified that Resident #525's call bell buttons were too…
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 26 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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, clinical record review, and facility policy for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #374) reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to implement a baseline care plan that met the immediate needs of a hemodynamically managed resident. The findings include: Resident #374's was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease with dependence on renal dialysis, type 2 diabetes with diabetic chronic kidney disease, and bipolar disorder. Physician orders dated 10/17/24 identified Resident #374 received dialysis at an outpatient dialysis facility every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The physician orders further identified Resident #374 received Lamotrigine 25 mg by mouth one time a day (a medication to stabilize mood in bipolar disorder). The Baseline Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 10/18/24 identified Resident #374 had experienced a subdural hematoma and was to have his/her vital signs monitored for changes and had fall interventions due to multiple…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 interviews, a review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #175) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), the facility failed to ensure Resident #175 was assisted with bed mobility according to the physician's orders and the resident's needs. The findings include: Resident #175 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses that included congestive heart and respiratory failure, muscle weakness and obesity. A Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #175 had a history of one to two falls within the past three months and was hospitalized between the dates of 10/4/24 through 10/16/24 for congestive heart failure and a right foot chronic ulcer that was debrided surgically with the placement of a wound vacuum. The Nursing admission Assessment further identified Resident #175 was non-ambulatory, was bed/chair-bound, and was incontinent. Although the admission Care Plan dated 10/16/24 did not identify that Resident #175 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 · Dcited before2024-10-25 · 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 interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for the only sampled resident (Resident #326) reviewed for tube feeding, the facility failed to ensure medication orders indicated an appropriate route of administration for a resident who was to have nothing by mouth (NPO). The findings include: Resident #326 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses that included dysphagia of oropharyngeal phase, gastrostomy (g-tube) status and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) with esophagitis. A physician's order dated 10/8/24 in the electronic health record (EHR) directed nothing by mouth (NPO) and to provide mouth care every shift and as needed. A physician's order dated 10/9/24 in the EHR directed NPO diet, NPO texture and NPO consistency. A physician's order dated 10/9/24 in the EHR directed Aspirin 81 mg oral tablet chewable give one tablet by mouth at bedtime (a discrepancy in the route of administration from the physician order NPO status 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-25 · 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, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to implement bumper guards and floor mats per the physician's order for a resident on seizure precautions and for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #11) reviewed edema, facility failed to follow physicians order for the application of heel booties. The findings include: 1. Resident #1's diagnoses included seizures, encephalopathy, and hemiplegia (paralysis) and hemiparesis (weakness) following cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting the right dominant side. A physician's order dated 10/8/24 directed seizure precautions to be in place every shift. A physician's order dated 10/9/24 directed to apply bumper guards to bed rails when in bed and floor mats at bedside when in bed, every shift related to seizures. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired,…
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 before2024-10-25 · 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 clinical record review, review of facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #374) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that appropriate assistance was provided with transfer of a resident, and for the only sampled resident (Resident #624) reviewed for smoking, the facility failed to ensure a smoking assessment was conducted as part of the initial admission assessment. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure appropriate disposal of used cigarette materials. The findings include: 1. Resident #374's diagnoses included acquired absence of left leg below knee, generalized muscle weakness, end stage renal disease, and hypertension. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #374 was alert, oriented but forgetful and required a wheel chair for mobility. An Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #374 with impairments in balance, fine motor coordination, gross motor coordination, mobility, sensation, strength,…
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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #11) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to administer oxygen per physician orders. The findings include: Resident #11's diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, heart failure and muscle weakness. A physician's order dated 9/7/24 directed to apply oxygen as needed to maintain oxygen saturations over 92% for heart failure. A physician's order dated 9/7/24 directed to apply oxygen at 15L via nasal cannula or non-rebreather mask as needed if oxygen saturation (blood oxygen level) fall below 90%. A physician's order dated 9/11/24 directed to administer oxygen at 2 liters via nasal cannula at baseline every shift. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #11 was moderately cognitively impaired, was dependent on staff for personal hygiene, bed mobility and transfers and supervision assistance with eating. Observations 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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, staff interviews, review of clinical records, and facility policy for the only sampled resident (Resident #374) reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to identify and monitor Resident #374 Arteriovenous (AV) fistula (an artificial connection made between an artery and a vein for dialysis access). The findings include: Resident #374's diagnoses included end stage renal disease with dependence on renal dialysis, type 2 diabetes with diabetic chronic kidney disease, and bipolar disorder. Physician orders dated 10/17/24 identified Resident #374 received dialysis at an outpatient dialysis facility every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The Baseline Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 10/18/24 identified Resident #374 had experienced a subdural hematoma and was to have his/her vital signs monitored for changes and had fall interventions due to multiple falls but failed to identify Resident #374 received dialysis and had a AV fistula in place. The admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified…
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 · D2024-10-25 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #674) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to ensure that a resident receiving an antipsychotic medication had an appropriate diagnosis and monitoring. Resident #674 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses that included anxiety/depression disorder, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and breast cancer. The Nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #674 was alert and oriented to person, place and time, communicated verbally, speech was clear and was able to understand and be understood when speaking. The Nursing admission Assessment further identified Resident #674's mood was pleasant with no unwanted behaviors. A physician's order dated 10/14/24 directed to give Zyprexa (an antipsychotic medication) 2.5 milligrams(mg), give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime related to anxiety disorder. a. A physician's order dated 10/14/24…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the clinical record and interviews, for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #625) reviewed for food concerns, the facility failed to provide the requested alternative menu option. The findings include: Resident #625's diagnoses included dysphagia, depression, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. The nurse's admission note dated 10/3/24 indicated that Resident #625 was taking nutrition orally and that his/her appetite had decreased since surgery. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/3/24 identified nutritional status and diet as a concern. Interventions included to provide diet and fluids as ordered. Interview with Resident #625 on 10/21/24 at 11:32 AM identified that he/she had not been receiving the menu substitutions that he/she had requested. Review of Resident #625's weight record identified that he/she had gained 3.8 pounds between 10/3/24 and 10/22/24. Observation on 10/25/24 at 9:00 AM, identified that Resident #625 had received pudding and not yogurt as indicated on their meal slip. Interview with Dietary Aide (DA) #1 on 10/25/24 at 9:14 AM indicated that 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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 staff interviews, review of clinical records, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #624) reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to offer a resident an influenza vaccine or document a refusal or proof of prior immunization of an influenza vaccine. The findings include: Resident #624 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses that included sepsis, chronic kidney disease, and type 2 diabetes. The Baseline Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 10/16/24 identified Resident #624 was at risk for falls and interventions included use of a call bell when assistance was needed. The admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #624 was alert and oriented to person, place, and time. The admission Nursing Assessment further identified that he/she had a right hip incision. Physician orders dated 10/16/24 identified that Resident #624 was weight bearing as tolerated with a rolling walker and directed to administer the Pneumovax 23 vaccine for pneumonia prophylaxis if…
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 before2024-03-27 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure wounds, the facility failed to ensure the responsible party was notified timely when a pressure wound worsened and the treatment plan changed. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, weakness, and status post recent COVID- 19 infection. Clinical record review identified Resident #1's spouse was the responsible party. An APRN progress note dated 12/20/2023 identified Resident #1 was seen to evaluate a redness on the coccyx cleft. The note identified the area was determined to be a decubitus ulcer of the coccygeal region, stage 1, described as a non-blanchable area with the plan to apply house barrier cream to coccyx every shift and as needed. An admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, dependent for personal hygiene and bed mobility,…
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 before2024-03-27 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three resident (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure wounds, the facility failed to ensure a urine sample and weekly weights were obtained timely, in accordance with physician orders. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, weakness, and status post recent COVID- 19 infection. Clinical record review identified Resident #1's spouse was the responsible party. An admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, dependent for personal hygiene and bed mobility, frequently incontinent, was at risk for development of pressure ulcers and had a deep tissue injury (DTI). A Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 12/25/2023 identified Resident #1 had DTI on the coccyx and was at nutritional risk. Interventions directed to reposition, pressure redistribution mattress, record and report any new changes, to follow 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 · D2024-03-27 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for two of three sampled residents (Resident #1 and #2) reviewed for pressure wounds, the facility failed to ensure the record was complete and accurate to include weekly skin assessment results and weights. The findings include: 1. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, weakness, and status post recent COVID- 19 infection. An admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, dependent for personal hygiene and bed mobility, frequently incontinent, was at risk for development of pressure ulcers and had a deep tissue injury (DTI). A Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 12/25/2023 identified Resident #1 had DTI on the coccyx. Interventions directed to record and report any new changes, to follow the facility skin care protocol and to monitor weight. A physician's order dated 12/29/2023 directed skin protocol Braden scale upon…
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 · E2022-07-08 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 staff records, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 4 of 6 sampled staff for NA # 2, NA # 3, LPN #1 and RN # 11) reviewed for staff competencies, the facility failed to provide annual staff competencies and evaluations per the facility assessment. The findings included: 1. Review of Nurse Aide (NA) #2 s personnel files identified that her last performance evaluation was complete 11/5/19 and although requested the facility was unable to provide an annual revalidation or competency validations except for COVID -19, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and handwashing dated 5/5/22. The facility failed to provide an annual competency validation for NA #2 after 11/5/19. 2. Review of NA #3's personnel files identified NA #3 was hired 7/28/2020 and noted NA # 3 completed her annual competencies on 7/28/20 upon hire. However, the facility was unable to provide NA # 3's annual revalidation or competency validations except for COVID -19, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 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 · Ecited before2022-07-08 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that proper beard restraint during food handling and preparation and failed to ensure that bottle juice store in the emergency food supply was not expired and that refrigerator/freezer temperature were monitored and maintained. The findings included: 1 Observation in Kitchen on 7/6/22 at 11:00 AM identified Maintenance Worker #1 entered the kitchen during meal preparations. 3 stations in the kitchen were prepping various meal components that included meat into steam table trays and side dish preparation. [NAME] #1 was at the meat tray table and there were 5 trays on the counter that were being prepared and open to air. Maintenance Worker #1 entered the kitchen from the back of the kitchen, walking through the 2 prep areas without the benefit of beard restraint or hair net and began to ask [NAME] #1 questions. Maintenance Worker #1 had facial hair that appeared to be longer than 1 inch in length. Subsequent 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 · Ecited before2022-07-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility Infection Control program, observations, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that an accurate surveillance data tool was in place to track infections and the facility failed to ensure that freshly laundered resident clothing was kept in a clean and sanitary manner. The findings included: A review of the facility antibiotic stewardship program on 7/7/22 identified the facility was able to provided a line list for infections requiring antibiotic use with McGeers criteria for June 2022. The facility also provided line lists for 12 months (January 2021 through December 2021. However, the facility was unable to provide any line lists or documentation regarding infection tracking or infection surveillance from January 2022 through May 2022. Interview with RN #7 (Infection Control IC Nurse) and RN #8 on 7/7/22 at 10:36 AM identified they were unable to locate infection tracking logs for January 2022 through May 2022. RN #8 reported the facility had been unable to locate any logs for 2022. RN #7 reported the facility 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 · D2022-07-08 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, observation, facility policy and interviews for 3 of 16 sampled residents (Residents #15, #31, #242) reviewed for advanced directives, the facility failed to ensure that the clinical record correctly reflected the advanced directive choice selected by the resident. The findings included: 1. Resident # 15 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses included Malignant Neoplasm of the brain, pancreatic and renal masses, and acute Cholecystitis. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #15's cognition and memory were intact. A signed Advanced Directive Form dated [DATE] identified that Resident #15's wishes included no Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), no intubation, and no enteral feedings. A physician's order dated [DATE] failed to identify a code status for Resident #15 reflected in the physician's orders. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated [DATE] identified a care plan for the resident's code…
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 · D2022-07-08 · 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 clinical record review, observation, facility documentation review, facility policy review and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for skin condition, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the state agency. The findings include: Resident #32's diagnoses included pleural effusion, chronic kidney disease, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, sepsis, atrial fibrillation, depression, anxiety, cognitive communication deficit and benign prostatic hyperplasia. An admission nursing assessment dated [DATE] at 7:08 PM which included a skin integrity assessment section that failed to identify that the resident had an open purpura to the left upper arm. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/17/22 identified Resident #32 at risk for complication from anti-coagulant. Intervention included to administered medication as ordered, laboratory as ordered and directed staff to report any signs and symptoms of bleeding. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-08 · 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 clinical record review, observation, facility documentation review and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for skin condition, thoroughly investigate the origin of the resident's open purpura to the left upper arm. The findings include: Resident #32's diagnoses included pleural effusion, chronic kidney disease, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, sepsis, atrial fibrillation, depression, anxiety, cognitive communication deficit and benign prostatic hyperplasia. An admission nursing assessment dated [DATE] at 7:08 PM which included a skin integrity assessment section that failed to identify that the resident had an open purpura to the left upper arm. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/17/22 identified Resident #32 at risk for complication from anti-coagulant. Intervention included to administered medication as ordered, laboratory as ordered and directed staff to report any signs and symptoms of bleeding. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #32 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 · Dcited before2022-07-08 · 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 clinical record review , observations facility policy and interviews for one resident ( Resident #744) reviewed for Leave Of Absence (LOA), the facility failed to document and communicate the resident's departure from the facility and one five residents (Resident #35) reviewed for safe medication administration, the facility failed to ensure safe administration of an extended release medication to meet professional standards . The findings indicated: 1.Resident #744's diagnoses included bipolar disorder and cervical disc disorder with radiculopathy high cervical region. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident # 744 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance with transfers, extensive assistance with walking in the corridor, and extensive assistance with toilet use. Resident #744 required the use of mobility devices, both a walker and a wheelchair. 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 before2022-07-08 · 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 clinical record review, observation, facility documentation review, facility policy review and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #286) reviewed for skin condition, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment for skin condition timely and the written physician order failed to specify the specific affected site. The findings include: Resident #286 had diagnoses included gout, right knee osteoarthritis, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, ischemic cardiomyopathy, hypertension, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). An admission nursing assessment on 6/21/22 at 4:24 PM - in part noted a skin integrity assessment which identified multiple open and close blisters to Resident # 286's bilateral lower extremity, open areas to right shin and left calf, redness to both heels, blisters to the right digits and redness to right knuckles. A review of clinical record of the Advance Practitioner Registered Nurse (APRN) note dated 6/23/22 at 1:45 PM - in part for skin identified 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, facility policy review and interviews for 3 medication storage rooms reviewed for temperature log maintenance, the facility failed to consistently maintain consistent temperature logs for 3 refrigerators reviewed and the facility failed to ensure that medication carts and medications were secured. The findings included: 1. Observations on 7/8/2022 at 11:15AM identified multiple omissions of temperature logs for the current month of July 2022,, June 2022 and May 2022 three medication storage rooms. Two medication storage rooms were missing log for July 2022 with multiple entries missing for June 2022 and May 2022 as well. An interview with the DNS on 7/8/2022 at 11:37AM identified that the logs should have temperature entries twice daily and indicated she could not explain why the temperature logs were missing for May, June and July 2022. Review of facility Medication Storage Policy directed in part, that medications requiring refrigeration are kept in a refrigerator at temperatures between 36°F and 46°F with a thermometer to allow for temperature monitoring.…
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 · D2022-07-08 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record reviews, facility policy review and interviews for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Resident # 193, #196, and #197) reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to ensure that education regarding the Covid 19 vaccine was provided to the resident, and that documentation regarding refusal of the Covid 19 vaccine was documented in the resident's medical record. The findings included: A review of Residents # 193, #196, and #197 clinical records on 7/7/22 failed to provide evidence that education regarding the Covid 19 vaccine was provided to the residents and any documentation regarding the resident's refusal of the Covid 19 vaccine documented in the medical record Interview with RN # 7 (Infection Control RN) on 7/7/22 at 10:36 AM identified the facility does not have any signed declinations or education provided to the residents regarding the Covid 19 vaccinations. RN #7 identified that the residents were transferred to the facility from outside acute care hospitals having declined Covid vaccinations. RN #7 indicated the facility does follow up with the resident 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-11-27 · 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, staff interviews and a review of the facility policy, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The findings include: Observation with the Food Service Director on 11/21/19 at 9:48 AM identified one refrigerator had five 2 to 3 inch blocks of 3.5 inch x 3.5 inch cheese slices wrapped in saran wrap and two (2) opened 1/3 filled 5 pound bags of shredded cheese without the benefit of an opened date on the containers. In a second refrigerator there were twelve opened containers of milk, and one 3/4 filled 46 fluid ounce container of tomato juice without the benefit of an opened date on the containers. The Food Service Director was unable to identify any dates on the items listed. Interview with the Food Service Director at the time of the observation identified all perishable food items should be dated when opened. He further indicated the milk cartons are picked up daily from the various areas and brought to the kitchen. He identified that the food service worker who opened or stored the item 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 · D2019-11-27 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
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 a clinical record review, staff interviews, and a review of facility documentation for one of two residents reviewed for discharge (Resident # 182), the facility failed to ensure equipment needed to return to the community was obtained on the planned discharge date that resulted in a delayed discharge. The findings include: Resident # 182 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, anxiety, abnormalities in gait and mobility, and hearing loss. An admission resident care plan dated 4/30/19 identified a problem related to activities of daily living (ADL) with self-care performance deficits related to dementia. Interventions included physical and occupational therapy. Resident # 182 was hospitalized from [DATE] through 5/14/19 and was readmitted with diagnosis that included acute renal failure. A 14-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident # 182 had short and long-term memory problems, required extensive assistance with bed mobility, 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 · D2019-11-27 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
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 a review of the clinical record, staff interviews and a review of the facility policy for one of five Residents reviewed for psychotropic medications (Resident #10), the facility failed to properly monitor targeted behaviors. The findings include: Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, insomnia, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. Physician's order dated 10/14/19 directed to administer Seroquel 50 milligrams (mg) by mouth at bedtime for depressive disorder, and Venlafaxine HCL ER (extended release) 187.5 mg by mouth one time a day related to depressive disorder. Additionally, the physician's order directed to perform behavior monitoring for psychoactive medication (Seroquel and Venlafaxine) every shift, and to monitor and document the number of behavior episodes during the shift. The order failed to identify what specific behavior to monitor for. An advance practice registered nurse (APRN) note dated 10/15/19 identified to monitor for change in mood,…
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
$14,069 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $14,069 — penalty dated 2025-08-27
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to RYDERS HEALTH MANAGEMENT — 7 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 6 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.7★, per CMS)
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBRIGLIO, MARTIN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 50% | since 02/01/1995 |
| SBRIGLIO, ROBERT | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 02/01/1995 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $978K 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
CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Connecticut Medicaid page for homes that do.
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 075412. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-25, 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.