Complete Care At Kimberly Hall-South
1 Emerson Drive, Windsor, CT 06095 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 180 certified beds · (860) 688-6443 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (27% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- 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 $14,728 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-14)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 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 — 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 31.1% | 18.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 6.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 76.9% | 22.3% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.6% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 31.5% | 16.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.5% | 17.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.9% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.0% | 4.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 33.4% | 24.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.7% | 17.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 54.2% | 69.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.8% | 24.3% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.4% | 10.7% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.42 | 2.06 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.20 | 1.46 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
60.7% 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 151 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 71.6% 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 81 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 | 60.7%CMS range 51.9–71.0 | 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 | 9.0%CMS range 6.3–12.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 71.6% | 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 | 72.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 59.3% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.6% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 6.2%CMS range 3.5–10.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.97 | 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 180 beds and averages 104.0 residents a day — about 58% occupied, or roughly 76 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.75 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.83 to 0.54 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 27% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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 · Jcited before2025-02-03 · 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 clinical record review, interviews, and review of facility documentation for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to adequately assess an Arteriovenous Fistula (AVF) (a surgical connection made between an artery and a vein accessed by needles to administer hemodialysis treatment) dialysis access site that was bleeding status post hemodialysis treatment to ensure bleeding had stopped, subsequently the resident had a significant bleed and was sent to the hospital and diagnosed with hemorrhagic shock requiring four (4) units of blood resulting in a finding of Immediate Jeopardy. The findings included: Resident #1's diagnoses included end stage renal disease and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated [DATE] identified the risk for injury or risk of complications related to renal dialysis with interventions that directed to observe for active bleeding and monitor hemodialysis access site for excessive redness, swelling, pain 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 · Dcited before2025-05-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #2) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to complete and document neurological checks after an unwitnessed fall per facility policy. The findings include: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included encephalopathy, dementia and adult failure to thrive. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 was verbally incomprehensible, was only orientated to person, required extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADL'S). The admission minimum data set MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8) and had one fall with no injury since admission. The care plan dated 4/5/24 identified Resident #2 was at risk for falls secondary to dementia with forgetfulness and impulsive behavior. Interventions included to assist Resident #2…
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 · D2025-05-01 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #2) reviewed for hospice, the facility failed to administer prescribed morphine during the dying process, for a prolonged period of time, after an ineffecive dose was administered. The findings include: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included encephalopathy, dementia and adult failure to thrive. A provider order dated 3/28/24 directed do not resuscitate. A provider order dated 4/5/24 directed morphine .25 ml by mouth every two (2) hours as needed for pain. The admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8) and received hospice care while a resident. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 4/23/24 identified hospice services began 4/11/24 due to an end stage diagnosis of dementia and failure to thrive. Interventions included 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-03 · 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 clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #2) reviewed for wounds, the facility failed to ensure staff developed a comprehensive care plan to include an alteration in skin integrity. The findings include: Resident #2's diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis and weakness of one side), diabetes, chronic kidney disease stage 4, and heart failure. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident # 2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of ten out of fifteen, indicative of moderate cognitive impairment and required total care for ALDs, rolling, and was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 1/29/2025 identified a risk for impairment to skin integrity secondary to generalized weakness, impaired mobility, incontinence and diabetes. Interventions directed use of pressure relieving devices in bed and/or chair,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure 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 clinical record review, facility documentation, polic review and interviews the facility failed to ensure that staff was educated and aware of what to do when a hemodialysis resident with an Ateriovenous Fistula (AVF) was noted to be bleeding from the AVF. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included end stage renal disease and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated [DATE] identified the risk for injury or risk of complications related to renal dialysis with interventions that directed to observe for active bleeding and monitor hemodialysis access site for excessive redness, swelling, pain at site, signs and symptoms of infection, and excessive bleeding from the site, and to report to physician as indicated. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of twelve (12), indicative of moderately impaired cognition. The MDS further identified Resident #1 required…
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 before2025-01-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, interviews, and review of facility documentation for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to safely transfer a resident while using a Hoyer Lift. The findings included: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included transient ischemic attack, cerebral infarction, difficulty walking, syncope and collapse. Review of the Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of eight (8) indicative of moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS further identified Resident #1 was dependent with chair to bed-to-chair transfers. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 8/20/24 identified the risk for decreased ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL's) and directed assist of two (2) bed mobility, toileting, dressing, bathing, and for transfers using a mechanical lift. Review of the Facility Licensing and Investigations Section Reportable Event Form dated 8/27/24…
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 · Dcited before2025-01-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, interview, and review of facility documentation reviewed for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for incontinent care, the facility failed to perform hand hygiene in accordance with facility policy. The findings included: Resident #1's diagnoses included Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications and a urinary tract infection. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 11/18/24 identified risk for decreased ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL's) including toileting with interventions that directed to provide the resident with extensive assist of one (1) for toileting hygiene. Review of the Comprehensive Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of twelve (12), indicative of moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS further identified Resident #1 was dependent with toileting hygiene and was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. Observation performed on 1/14/25 at 2:45 PM…
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 before2024-11-19 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident # 68) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs), the facility failed to ensure that the resident's choices related to care were honored. The findings include: Resident # 68 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included quadriplegia, neuralgia, and neurogenic bowel. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident # 68 had intact cognition, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and was dependent on staff to assist with toileting, bathing and transfers. A physician's order dated 4/26/24 directed to Resident #68 was to be assisted back to bed by 8 PM each day per resident request. Review of the record identified the order was originally entered into the electronic record by RN #3. The care plan dated 5/3/24 identified it was important to Resident #68 to have the opportunity to engage in daily routines relative to preferences. Interventions included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-19 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #66 and 70) reviewed for Advance Directives, the facility failed to review code status, with the resident and resident's representative according to facility policy. The findings include: 1. Resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stage 2 chronic kidney disease. The care plan dated [DATE], (revised [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE]), identified Resident #66 had an established advance directive CPR (Cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Interventions included activating resident's advance directive, as indicated, providing resident/health care decision maker with sufficient information to make an informed decision, and reviewing contents and providing opportunity to update and/or make changes to Advance Directive with resident and/or healthcare decision maker quarterly and as needed. The admission MDS dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-19 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #8 and 66) reviewed for non-pressure skin condition, the facility failed to notify the provider or resident representative of a change in condition and allegation of abuse. The findings include: 1. Resident #8 was admitted to the facility in January 2023 with diagnoses that included dementia and end stage renal disease requiring dialysis. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified a healed abrasion to the mid forehead. The physician's admission history and physician dated 1/24/23 did not reflect an area to the forehead. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #8 had severely impaired cognition. a. Review of the provider notes and nurse's notes dated 1/1/24 to 5/12/24 did not reflect the area to the to the resident's forehead. Review of the skin weekly skin checks performed by a licensed nurse dated 4/3/24 to 5/8/24 did not reflect any new or current skin injury…
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 · D2024-11-19 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 #66) reviewed for Advance Directive, the facility failed to ensure resident care conferences (RCC) were completed quarterly. The findings include: Resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stage 2 chronic kidney disease. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #66 was admitted from a short-term general hospital and had moderately impaired cognition. The care plan dated 11/17/23 identified Resident #66 was at risk for limited meaningful engagement related to self-isolation. Interventions included providing opportunities for choice during care/activities to provide a sense of control. The social service notes dated 11/4/23 through 11/19/24 failed to identity quarterly care conferences were completed from 11/4/23 through 7/17/24; quarterly care conferences were completed on 7/18/24, 8/1/24, 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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #8) reviewed for non-pressure skin condition, the facility failed to document an RN assessment when the resident was identified with a scabbed area on the forehead, and for 1 resident (Resident #68) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), the facility failed to ensure that a low air loss mattress was set per the physician's orders. The findings include: 1. Resident #8 was admitted to the facility in January 2023 with diagnoses that included dementia and end stage renal disease requiring dialysis. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified a healed abrasion to the mid forehead. The physician's admission history and physician dated 1/24/23 did not reflect an area to the forehead. The quarterly MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #8 had severely impaired cognition. a. Review of the provider notes and nurse's notes dated 1/1/24 to 5/12/24 did not reflect the area to the 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-19 · 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 review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #6) who required a specialty medical intervention and fluid restriction, the facility failed to ensure fluid intake and output were monitored according to professional standards and facility policy. The findings include: Resident #6 was admitted to the facility in August 2024 with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, and congestive heart failure. The admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident #6 had moderate cognitive impairment, required supervision with eating and dependent with toileting hygiene. The care plan dated 9/16/24 identified Resident #6 exhibited impaired renal function and was at risk for complications related to dependence of hemodialysis. Interventions included hemodialysis on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at the dialysis center. Observe, document, and report to the MD/APRN for signs and symptoms of fluid overload (increase shortness…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · 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 reviews, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for change in condition, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified at the time when there was a new onset of drainage from the surgical incision after the incision was bumped. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included acquired absence of right leg below the knee, gangrene, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and end stage renal disease. A physician's order dated 8/28/24 directed to don Nutmegger (stocking to shrink stump) to the right lower extremity at all times, remove every shift for skin inspections, leave the sutures in place to the right below the knee amputation, monitor the incision line every shift for signs and symptoms of infection, and update the physician or Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) as needed with noted abnormalities. The resident care plan dated 8/29/24 identified Resident #1 was admitted with a right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · 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 reviews, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for wound treatments, the facility failed to assess the surgical site every shift in accordance with the physician's order and document when the resident refused the assessment be conducted. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included acquired absence of right leg below the knee, gangrene, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and end stage renal disease. A physician's order dated 8/28/24 directed to don Nutmegger (stocking to shrink stump) to the right lower extremity at all times, remove every shift for skin inspections, leave the sutures in place to the right below the knee amputation, monitor the incision line every shift for signs and symptoms of infection, and update the physician or Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) as needed with noted abnormalities. The resident care plan dated 8/29/24 identified Resident #1 was admitted with a right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure injury to the left heel, the facility failed to ensure a wound assessment was conducted. The findings include: Resident #1 had diagnoses that included acquired absence of right leg below the knee, gangrene, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and end stage renal disease. A physician's order dated 8/28/24 directed to monitor the deep tissue site to left heel for changes, update the physician with noted abnormal changes, and apply skin prep to left heel every evening shift for prevention. The resident care plan dated 8/29/24 identified Resident #1 was at risk for alteration in skin and had a left deep tissue injury on admission. Interventions directed weekly skin check by the licensed nurse. Review of the Treatment Administration Record from 8/29/24 to 9/4/24 identified the skin prep was applied to the left heel every evening shift. Review of the clinical record failed to identify documentation related to a completed wound assessment…
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 before2024-07-15 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents, (Resident #1), reviewed for medications administration, the facility failed to notify the physician when a medication was not administered in accordance with physician orders. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of prostate and heart failure. Review of the hospital discharge instructions dated 6/24/24 identified to continue taking abiraterone 250 mg tablet four tablets by mouth every morning on an empty stomach (a medication used to treat prostate cancer) . The medication was last administered in the hospital on 6/24/24 at 6:00 AM. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was admitted to the facility for metastatic prostate cancer to the bone. Resident #1 was alert and oriented and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADL's). 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents, (Resident #1), reviewed for medications, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered in accordance with physician orders. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of prostate and heart failure. Review of the hospital discharge instructions dated 6/24/24 identified to continue taking abiraterone 250 mg tablet four tablets by mouth every morning on an empty stomach (a medication used to treat prostate cancer) . The medication was last administered in the hospital on 6/24/24 at 6:00 AM. The nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was admitted to the facility for metastatic prostate cancer to the bone. Resident #1 was alert and oriented and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADL's). A physician's order dated 6/24/24 directed Abiraterone…
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 before2024-07-03 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one of four sampled residents (Resident #1) who were dependent on staff for activities of daily living, the facility failed to ensure incontinent care was provided timely and failed to check on the resident every one (1) hour and reposition the resident every two (2) hours in accordance with the physician's orders and the care plan. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included quadriplegia, anxiety, neuropathic bladder, and neurogenic bowel. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact, was always incontinent of urine and stool, was at risk for skin breakdown, required extensive two (2) person assistance with turning and repositioning when in bed for bed, bathing and extensive one (1) person assistance with dressing and personal hygiene. The Resident Care Plan dated 5/3/24 identified Resident #1 was at risk for skin breakdown, had a self-care deficit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-19 · 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
Based on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who were reviewed for the administration of the morning medication, the facility failed to administer medications in accordance with the standard of practice, one hour before or after the designated time per the physician's order. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of the bladder neck and bladder, malignant neoplasm of the medulla of the left adrenal gland, and pulmonary embolism. An admission physician's order dated 9/27/23 directed Midodrine HCL 4 milligrams (MG) give one tablet by mouth before meals for low blood pressure, Cyproheptadine HCL 4 mg give one tablet by mouth before meals at bedtime, Calcium Carbonate 500 mg give two tablets by mouth with meals, Prednisone 5mg give two tablets by mouth once a day, Fludrocortisone Acetate 0.1 mg once a day, Lidoderm patch 5% apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain at bedtime remove, Polyethylene Glycol 3350 powder give 17 gram once a day, Oxycodone HCL ER 12…
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 · E2022-05-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of facility policy and staff interviews for three of five medication rooms, the facility failed to ensure that medications were within acceptable expiration dates to meet profession standard of practice. The findings included: 1. Observation on 5/17/22 at 3:05 PM of the second floor Fairfield Unit medication room identified the following expired medications: Budesonide Suspension with an expiration date of 10/21, Ventolin AFA with an expiration date of 4/22, hydrogen peroxide with expiration date of 8/20 and hydrocortisone suppository with expiration date of 11/21. Interview with LPN #2 on 5/17/22 at 3:20 PM. identified she was unable to identify who was responsible for checking expired medications in the medication room. LPN #2 on 5/17/22 was also unable to identify how often the nurse should check for the expired medication. 2.Observation on 5/17/22 at 3:15 PM of the [NAME] (E) unit identified multiple expired medications: an open bottle of prednisolone solution 15mg/5ml opened…
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 · E2022-05-23 · tag F0800 — patternProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary 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 upon observation, clinical record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide resident specific food preferences for meals for five sampled residents (Residents #16, #17, #74, #83 and #444) reviewed for food preferences at mealtime. The findings included: 1.Resident #16's diagnoses included acute on chronic diastolic (congestive heart failure), and dementia. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident was moderately cognitively impaired, required limited one-person physical assistance with eating and noted no weight loss or gain of 5% in the last month and no weight loss or gain of 10% in the last month or 6 months. 5/16/22 12:20PM during dining Resident #16's meal ticket noted the resident requested salad but was served baked chicken, cubed oven baked potatoes and a roll, no vegetables. The resident was observed with no salad at time of the observation. When a family member inquired about the resident salad the NA indicated there was no salad. Observation of the kitchen…
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 before2022-05-23 · 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 observations, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents' laundry was handled by donning appropriately and failed to clean Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to prevent the spread of infection. The findings included: 1.Observation of the laundry on 5/17/22 at 11:00 AM AM with the Infection Preventionist identified laundry staff #1 attempted to correctly don a Personal Protection Equipment gown that was hanging on a hook, inside out with success on the third try. The gown was a 3-armhole isolation gown that is donned by placing arms into the traditional sleeves and then sliding the left arm through the opening in the protective panel and in the failed attempts, Laundry Staff # 1 first placed his head through the hole in the protective panel each time which would not allow him to put his arms through the gown's sleeves so that he could don the gown properly. Interview with Laundry staff #1 identified that it was the regular staff's day off, but he was covering and had completed the Resident laundry that morning, donning the gown,…
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 · D2022-05-23 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 the facility policy and staff interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident # 68) reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to notify the resident's responsible party of the facility's bed hold policy in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident's diagnoses included neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, primary insomnia, COVID 19, pulmonary fibrosis, hyperlipidemia, depression, gastrostomy, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, Parkinson disease, dementia without behavior disturbances, tracheostomy status, history transient ischemic attack, CVA, atrial fibrillation, anemia, hypertension, and pneumonia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident was severely cognitively impaired, required extensive assistance with bed mobility and personal hygiene. The physician's order dated 5/5/22 directed for transfer Do Not Resuscitate. The discharge assessment return anticipated dated 5/5/22 identified the 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 · D2022-05-23 · 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 observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one resident (Resident # 19) reviewed for hydration, the facility failed to ensure the resident's comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team when Resident #19 had a change in condition. The findings include: Resident # 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dysphagia following cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following stroke, aphasia following cerebral infarction. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident # 19 had intact cognition, was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder and required extensive assistance of 1 with bed mobility and personal hygiene. The quarterly assessment also noted the resident requires assist of one for eating, The care plan dated 3/14/2022 failed to identify a revision to the care plan after a change in condition. The care plan failed to identify that Resident #1 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 before2022-05-23 · 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 observations, review of facility policy and interviews for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #64 and Resident #69), the facility failed to secure the biohazard room and the housekeeping cart to keep the environment free from accident hazards. The findings included: 1. Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included vascular dementia with behavioral disturbances. The physician's order dated 1/17/22 directed to utilize a Wander Guard/Wander Elopement Device due to poor safety awareness which expires 1/2022 and to update the physician's order with new date when bracelet is changed. Additionally, the physician's orders dated 1/17/22 directed to check the device and functioning every night. The physician's order dated 1/18/2022 directed to utilize a Wander Guard/Wander Elopement Device due to poor safety awareness, which expires 4/20/25. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #64 had severely impaired cognition, required extensive…
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 · D2022-05-23 · 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 observations, review of facility policy, clinical record review and interviews for one of five residents (Resident #69) reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to screen and offer the Resident the influenza vaccine. The findings include: Resident #69 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included dementia and hypertension. A review of the Resident #69's clinical record identified an Influenza Vaccination Form dated 12/11/19 that documented the resident had refused the influenza vaccination but failed to provide any documentation that Resident #69 was screened or offered the influenza vaccination when admitted to the facility. Interview with the DNS on 5/32/22 at 9:30 AM identified that Resident #69 was evacuated from another corporate facility and admitted [DATE]. The DNS continued by stating that she assumed the Resident had been offered the influenza vaccine at the other facility and that the other facility had offered the Resident the influenza vaccine. The DNS added that it was 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 · Ecited before2019-10-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
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 and staff interview for one of three sampled residents (Resident # 20) who required assistance with Activities of Daily Living, the facility failed to ensure the resident received showers in accordance his/her plan of care. The finding include: Resident # 20's diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type 2, major depression, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH), osteoarthritis, anxiety, congestive heart failure, morbid obesity, chronic atrial fibrillation and insomnia. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident's cognition and memory were intact and the resident required total dependence from the staff with bed mobility, transfers and toilet use. A review of the ADL flow sheet dated for June 2019 identified the resident had a bed baths on 6/3/19, 6/5/19 6/6/19 , 6/17/19, 618/19, 6/19/19, 6/20/19, 6/22/19 and 6/24/19. Additionally the ADL flow sheets for July 2019 identified the resident had a bed baths on July 2019 on 7/1/19,…
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 before2019-10-24 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 and staff interview for one of three sampled residents (Resident # 20) who required assistance with Activities of Daily Living, the facility failed to honor the resident's preference regarding bed time. The findings include: Resident # 20's diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type 2, major depression, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH), osteoarthritis, anxiety, congestive heart failure, morbid obesity, chronic atrial fibrillation and insomnia. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident's cognition and memory were intact and the resident required total dependence from the staff with bed mobility, transfers and toilet use. Interview with Resident #20 on 10/21/19 at 3:45 P.M. identified that Nurse Aide (NA) #5 who recently assisted him/her with hour of sleep care handled him/her roughly and would not listen to him/her when he/she ( Resident # 20) told NA # 5 he/she did not want to go to bed at 6:15 P.M. Resident # 20 also…
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 before2019-10-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and procedures for one of three residents noted with a change in condition (Resident #50), the facility failed to develop a comprehensive plan of care with interventions, goal and timeframes to address the resident's contractures and diagnosis of osteoporosis. The findings include: Resident #50's diagnoses included osteoarthritis, diabetes mellitus II, and dementia with behavioral disturbance, vascular wound to the left calf, Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) and peripheral arterial disease, dysphagia, aphasia, and glaucoma and mood disorder. A quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident as severely impaired for decision-making skills, requiring total assistance from staff for most ADL, functional limitation in range of motion on both sides for upper and lower extremities and without having a fracture in the past 6 months. A Reportable Event (RE) dated 9/30/19 at 3:09 P.M. noted in part, Resident #50 had an X-Ray of…
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 before2019-10-24 · 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 and staff interview for one of three residents in the survey sample reviewed for accidents (Resident # 396), the facility failed to ensure the neurological data collection related to the frequency of the assessment after a fall with a suspected head injury was based on professional standards of quality. The findings include: Resident # 396 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included pyogenic arthritis of the left knee, end stage renal disease, ischemic heart disease, diabetes mellitus, and adjustment disorder with depressed mood. An admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident # 396 had no cognitive impairment, no behaviors, noted the resident required extensive assist with bed mobility and transfer, did not walk, had a history of a fall in the last 2-6 months prior to admission, and indicated the resident received a dialysis. A RCP dated June 2019 identified a problem related to risk for falls related to impaired mobility. Interventions…
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 before2019-10-24 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and interview for one of three residents ( Resident #21) reviewed for pressure ulcer, the facility failed to ensure the resident's pressure reduction device was in the in the resident's wheel chair when the resident went for his/her specialized treatment . The finding included: Resident diagnoses included major depression, obesity, osteoarthritis, hypertension neuropathy. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident's cognition and memory were intact, the resident required total dependence from the staff with bed mobility, transfers, toileting and personal hygiene. The RCP dated 5/2/19 and 8/15/19 for at risk for skin breakdown related to impaired sensation, limited mobility and actual skin breakdown secondary to moisture and excessive perspiration. Interventions directed to encourage the resident to get out of bed into the wheel chair on Monday/ Wednesday /Friday as agreed, to turn and reposition the resident and check skin four times per shift and frequently…
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 · D2019-10-24 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the clinical record, facility policy and procedures and interview for one of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Mediation and behaviors (Resident #72), the facility failed to ensure the resident's target behaviors were monitored. The findings include: Resident #72's diagnoses included Diabetes Mellitus type II, PVD, anxiety disorder, mood disorder and dementia with behavioral disturbance. The RCP updated 9/19/19 identified resistive to care as the focus. Interventions included: to monitor conditions that may contribute to resistance to care, observe medications, especially new and/or changed and/or discontinued for side effects and the resident's response contributing to resisting care. The psychiatric notes dated 9/23/19 identified in part, the resident's Remeron was increased from 22.5 MG to 45 MG. Resident # 72 was seen for symptoms of being angry and refusing care. The psychiatric note also indicated the resident was not a currently a risk for suicide and was not currently a harm others A review of Psychiatry Communication form dated 9/23/19 listed target…
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 · D2019-10-24 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for 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 clinical record review, review of facility documentation and interview for one sampled resident (Resident #23) reviewed for dental needs, the facility failed to ensure the resident was seen by the dental staff per resident request. The finding include: Resident # 23's diagnoses included depression, hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type 2. The admission Record identified the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Dental Health Drive Form dated 1/3/19 for request for services identified No- I will make alternate arrangements for dental services. The Health Drive form dated 5/2/19 for request for services not Yes- I request to be seen by the dentist. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] cognition and memory intact and the resident required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. The RCP dated 8/19/19 identified risk for oral health or dental care problems evidenced by broken, loose and carious teeth. Interventions included to obtain dental referral as needed. The physician's orders…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-11-19 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interview for 6 of 6 residents (Resident #6, 66, 68, 73, 80, and 101), who had been transferred to the hospital, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of the hospital transfers. The findings include: 1. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility in [DATE] with diagnoses that included diabetes, end stage renal disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of the census form identified Resident #6 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. An SBAR summary dated [DATE] at 8:18 PM identified Resident #6 was readmitted to the facility that evening with diagnoses of acute encephalopathy, returned to baseline mental status. Review of the action summary report for the month of [DATE] failed to reflect the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman had been notified of Resident #6's hospitalization on [DATE]. 2. Resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2022-05-23 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of facility policy and staff interviews, the facility failed to post the state agency address for filing a grievance in an area for residents and visitors. The findings include: Observations on 5/18/22 from 10:40 AM to 10:50 AM of the second floor Resident Information Board for residents and visitors lacked documentation of the state agency address for filing a grievance. Further observation on 5/18/22 at 11:30 AM on the first floor identified although the Resident Information Board had the state agency telephone number there was no documentation to identify the address and location of the state agency. Interview at 10:50 AM with the Social Worker identified she thought the state agency telephone number was located on the Resident Information Board outside her office. Interview with the DNS on 5/18/22 at 11:35 AM identified she thought the telephone and address of the state agency was noted on the Resident Board on the first floor. Subsequent to inquiry the facility posted the state agency address for filing a grievance on the Resident Information…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2019-10-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 documentations and interviews for one of fifteen rooms reviewed on the D-wing unit (room [ROOM NUMBER]), the facility failed to ensure the resident's bathroom was safe, clean and homelike .The findings include: During tour of the D-wing unit on 10/21/19 at 9:45 A.M. observations of a bathroom in room [ROOM NUMBER] identified the floor surrounding the base of the toilet had several missing floor tiles on the right and left side of the toilet. The lower back wall (to the left of the toilet) had a breach and/or opening with cracked and ripped wallpaper. The brown baseboard molding below the breach was warped and had a bulging appearance. The wallpaper surrounding the grab bar to the left of the toilet was cracked, ripped and separated from the wall. Observation of the left upper corner of the ceiling noted a missing ceiling tile. The opening where the missing ceiling was noted identified a portion of a cinder block wall, cob webs and portions of a HVAC (heating,…
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
$14,728 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $14,728 — penalty dated 2025-01-14
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 COMPLETE CARE — 85 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 | 4 of 5 | 3.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 84 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 84; lowest-rated first.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC GEN CT OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 11/15/2022 |
| PC GEN CT OPCO TOPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 11/15/2022 |
| PC GEN CT TOPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 11/15/2022 |
| SMS 2021 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 11/15/2022 |
| DES CAPITAL LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| JRK INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| KLUGMAN, JACOB | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| STEIN, SHALOM | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| STERNBUCH, DANIEL | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| GALLAGHER, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| HOCH, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| LAGANA, KRISTIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| RUSSO, THOMAS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| TETREAULT, MARNIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| KIMBERLY HALL SOUTH PROPCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| PEACE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| MESSENGER, MONICA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/02/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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 $780K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CT
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Connecticut Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 075237. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-11-19, 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.