Vernon Rehabilitation And Healthcare 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.

55.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 261 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 150 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 35% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 115.1 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 4.13 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.28 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-03 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure an order was obtained timely for use of a continuous positive airway pressure machine. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen level) and COPD. The admission assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #1 was alert and oriented and had a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine. Nursing admission Note dated 1/9/2025 at 11:35 PM identified Resident #1 used a CPAP machine and received respiratory treatments. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 1/9/2025 identified Resident #1 had a care plan for cardiopulmonary symptoms. Interventions directed to administer medications as ordered, monitor for change in breathing pattern and lung sounds, and oxygen saturation every shift. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility policy, and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #96) reviewed for weight loss, the facility failed to notify the dietician in order to make recommendations when a significant weight loss occurred. The findings include: Resident #96's diagnoses include cerebral infarction, dysphagia, and cholecystitis. The Resident Care Plan dated 3/8/24 through 7/2924 identified Resident #96 was on a mechanically altered diet secondary to dysphagia. Interventions included to provide a regular ground diet with thin liquids, encouraging fluids, intake and output as needed, nutritional assessments as needed, supplements as ordered, and weights as ordered. Resident #96's admission Nutritional Evaluation from the dietician and dated 3/11/24 at 11:53 AM identified Resident #96 weighed 141.2 pounds (lbs.). The Nutritional Evaluation further identified the dietician was provided with Resident #96's food preferences and did not identify any dietary concerns, or cultural…

  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 · D2024-10-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to report injuries of unknown source to the state agency (SA) timely. The findings include: Resident #3's diagnoses included vascular dementia, osteoarthritis and a fracture of the left hand. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 was significantly cognitively impaired and required substantial/maximal assistance with transfers and toileting, and supervision or touching assistance with bed mobility. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/13/24 identified a risk for skin injuries (bruising/bleeding/skin tears) and a potential for falls. Interventions included to inspect skin daily during care, encourage to call for assistance, and orient to surroundings. An APRN progress note dated 7/4/24 at 1:01 PM identified Resident #3 had an area of bruising (spontaneous ecchymosis) on the lateral side of his/her left orbital…

  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 · D2024-10-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #96) reviewed for weight loss, and for 1 of 6 sampled residents (Resident #706) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to revise the Resident Care Plan (RCP) when a change occured. The findings include: 1. Resident #96's diagnoses included cerebral infarction, dysphagia, and right sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis. An initial Nutritional Evaluation dated 3/11/24 at 11:53 AM and written by the dietician identified that on 3/11/24, Resident #96 weighed 141.2 pounds (lbs.). The Nutritional Evaluation further identified the dietician was provided with Resident #96's food preferences and did not identify any dietary concerns or cultural accommodations for meal offerings. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #96 had severe cognitive impairment, required substantial assistance with chair/bed to chair transfers, and required set-up…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · 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 observations, review of the clinical record, and interviews for the only sampled resident (Resident # 46) reviewed for Hospice, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for the application of arm protectors, for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #96) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to obtain and document the resident's weekly weights per physician orders for a resident with a significant weight loss. The findings include: 1. Resident #46's diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbances, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #46 was severely cognitively impaired and totally dependent for bed mobility, upper and lower body dressing, and transfers. A Physician's order dated 9/9/24 directed to apply bilateral arm protectors to be worn at all times, may be removed for care and reapplied every shift. The Resident's Care Plan in effect from 10/1/24 to 10/11/24 identified a potential for skin impairment.…

  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 · D2024-10-11 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for positioning and mobility, the facility failed to provide range of motion (ROM) to a dependent resident. The findings include: Resident #357's diagnoses included fracture of the right humerus (broken bone of the upper arm), and congestive heart failure. The admission Nursing Evaluation dated 10/3/24 identified Resident #357 was cognitively intact, mobility was very limited and was unable to make significant changes independently, and his/her ability to walk was severely limited and required moderate assistance. The Resident Care Plan dated 10/4/24 identified Occupational Therapy for alteration in self-care and activities of daily living (ADLs) deficit related to decreased strength. Interventions included Occupational Therapy 5 times a week, non-weight bearing (NWB) of the right upper arm, leave the sling on at all times, may remove 3 times daily for active range of motion (AROM) of the right elbow, wrist, and fingers only. A physician's order…

  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 · D2024-10-11 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  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, review of facility policy and staff interviews for 2 of 3 residents, (Resident #96 and #406), reviewed for nutrition and hydration, for Resident #96 the facility failed to implement interventions for a resident who continued to experience significant weight loss, and for Resident #406, the facility failed to consistently document intake and output for a resident on intravenous hydration. The findings include: 1. Resident #96's diagnoses include cerebral infarction, cholecystitis, and dysphagia. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 3/8/24 through 9/11/24 identified Resident #96 was on a mechanically altered diet secondary to dysphagia. Interventions included a regular ground diet with thin liquids, encouraging fluids, intake and output as needed, nutritional assessments as needed, supplements as ordered, and weights as ordered. A Nutritional Evaluation dated 3/11/24 at 11:53 AM written by the dietician identified Resident #96's weighed 141.2 pounds (lbs.) and…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure 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 the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #85) reviewed for hospitalization, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who was hospitalized for digoxin toxicity did not receive the same high risk medication (digoxin) on readmission from the hospital which resulted in a significant medication error. The findings include: Resident #85 's diagnoses included atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, and thrombophilia. The admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #85 was cognitively intact, required staff assistance with toileting, required total/maximum assistance of two staff members for transfers, and was non-ambulatory. Review of the Resident Care Plan (RCP) in effect 9/30/24 through 10/11/24 identified Resident #85 was at risk for cardiac distress. Interventions included to administer medications as ordered and monitor for adverse effects. The RCP failed to identify that Resident #85 had been hospitalized with digoxin…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0849 — isolated
  Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation and interviews for the only sampled resident, (Resident #46), reviewed for hospice, the facility failed to collaborate and communicate the provision of hospice services with the contracted hospice provider. The findings include: Resident #46's diagnoses included major depressive disorder, dementia without behavioral disturbances, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety. A W-10 (transfer document) signed by Resident #46's physician on 3/22/23 directed Resident #46 to be admitted to the facility on comfort care and to notify hospice with any changes in condition or needs. The Nursing admission Evaluation dated 3/23/23. Identified Resident #46 was totally dependent for personal hygiene, mobility, transfers, and toilet use. Further, Resident #46's discharge goal was to remain in the facility with hospice care coordination. The nursing admission note dated 3/23/23 at 7:42 PM identified that when Resident #46 arrived, he/she was unable to…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-14 · 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 clinical record review, interviews and facility documentation for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to report a change of condition to the physician and/or Advanced Practice Registered Nurse timely. The findings included: Resident #1 had diagnoses of unspecified congestive heart failure, unspecified osteoarthritis, and unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of the Resident Care Plan dated 6/26/24 identified Resident #1 had a potential for falls with interventions that included the bed to be in the lowest position, encourage to call for assistance, call bell with in reach and to keep the resident's area clutter free. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact, had no limitation with Range of Motion (ROM), required set-up assistance with eating. Review of a Reportable Event form dated 7/11/24 at 2:00 AM identified Resident #1 was found lying on the right side of his/her…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ATLAS HEALTHCARE — 29 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 44 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $2.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CT