Complete Care At Annapolis
900 Van Buren Street, Annapolis, MD 21403 · For profit - Corporation · 97 certified beds · (410) 267-8653 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 5 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 | 11.8% | 20.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.7% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 43.0% | 22.8% | 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 | 0.8% | 2.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.7% | 22.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.0% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.6% | 5.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.5% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.2% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.7% | 80.6% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.1% | 21.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.4% | 9.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.91 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.87 | 1.20 | 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.
53.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 110 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 90.3% 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 72 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 56% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 | 53.6%CMS range 44.2–62.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.9%CMS range 9.9–16.7 | 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 | 90.3% | 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 | 75.0% | 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 | 73.6% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 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 | 6.6%CMS range 3.7–11.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.15 | 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 97 beds and averages 78.0 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.82 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.84 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.46 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-10 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interview with residents, and the facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that quarterly resident fund account statements were provided to residents. This was evident for four residents (Residents #86, # 1, #3 and #47) out of five residents reviewed for personal funds during the facility's recertification survey.The findings include:On 03/06/2026 at 7:45 AM, during the initial tour of the facility, some residents provided statements regarding quarterly statement of account as follows.On 03/03/2026 at 9:09 AM, Resident #86 stated that he/she did not receive a quarterly statement.On 03/03/2026 at 9:42 AM, Resident#1 stated that he/she had an account with the facility but had never received statements and requested that statements be provided.On 03/03/2026 at 10:05 AM, Resident #3 stated that he/she had never received a statement of account.On 03/03/2026 at 11:55 AM, Resident #47 stated that he/she did not always receive quarterly fund statements.On 03/06/2026 at 10:11 AM, the surveyor requested that the Business Office Manager (BOM)…
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 before2026-03-10 · 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
Based on interviews, observations and record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to revise residents care plan in a timely manner and implement the care plan interventions. This was evident for 2 (Resident #93 and #8) out of 2 residents reviewed for falls during the annual survey. The findings include:A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It is used to plan, assess and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care.1). On 3/03/2026 at 8:39 AM, an interview with Resident #93 was conducted. They reported that they fell a while ago. During the interview, the surveyor observed the bed to be in a high position. On 3/04/2026 at 1:10 PM, the surveyor observed Resident #93's bed in a high position when interviewing the resident regarding their oral care.On 3/05/2026 at 11:39 AM, a review of Resident #93's medical records was conducted. The review revealed that the resident had an actual fall on 1/13/2025. Further review of the care plan revealed a statement that indicated Resident #93 was at high risk for falls related to deconditioning…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-10 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and observations it was determined that the facility failed to utilize Video Remote Interpreting (VRI) services to communicate with deaf residents. This was evident for 1 (Resident #47) out of 4 residents reviewed for communication-sensory impairment during the annual survey. Video Remote Interpreting (VRI) is a service that uses video technology to connect a deaf or hard of hearing person with a sign language interpreter who appears on a screen (tablet, computer, or monitor). The interpreter signs what the staff say and voices what the resident signs so both sides can understand each other. The findings include: On 03/03/2026 at 8:25 AM, the surveyor observed a sign outside Resident #47's room indicating that the resident was deaf. At the same time, an interview with Geriatric Nurse Assistant (Staff #7), revealed that she communicated with Resident #47 through written communication. On 03/03/2026 at 9:13 AM, an interview with Geriatric Nurse Assistant (Staff #8), revealed that she communicated with Resident #47 through written communication. On 03/03/2026 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 · D2026-03-10 · 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
Based on interviews and medical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide oral hygiene care and showers to dependent residents. This was evident for 2 (Resident #93 and #86) out of 3 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care during the annual survey.The findings include:1). On 3/03/2026 at 8:39 AM, an interview with Resident #93 was conducted. They reported that no one at the facility cleaned their teeth and that a family member came in to the facility to assist with oral hygiene once a week. On 3/04/2026 at 12:02 PM, a review of Resident #93's medical records was conducted. The review revealed Minimum Data Set (MDS) Section GG that indicated the resident required partial/moderate assistance to perform oral hygiene. Further review of the resident's care plan indicated that the resident had an ADL self-care deficit related to fatigue and tremors to upper extremities. It also stated that the resident required extensive assistance to maximize independence.On 3/04/2026 at 1:10 PM, a follow up interview with Resident #93 was conducted.…
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 before2026-03-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that oxygen administration equipment was dated and labeled after being changed in accordance with physician orders and facility expectations. This was evident for 2 (Residents #109 and #20) out of 2 residents reviewed for oxygen therapy during the facility's recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: On 03/03/2026 at 7:59 AM, during the initial tour of the facility, Resident #109 was observed eating breakfast in bed. The resident was receiving oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula. The nasal cannula tubing was observed without a date or label.On 03/03/2026 at 8:11 AM, during the continued tour, Resident #20 was observed in bed preparing to eat breakfast. The resident was receiving oxygen at approximately 1.8 LPM via nasal cannula. The nasal cannula tubing was observed without a date or label.On 03/04/2026 at 7:27 AM, a review of the physician's orders for Resident #20 indicated an order for oxygen at 2 L/min via nasal cannula as needed for shortness of breath…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-10 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer time sensitive medication on time. This was evident for 1 (Resident #108) out of 7 residents reviewed during the recertification survey. The findings include: On 3/03/2026 at 9:53 AM, an interview with Resident #108 was conducted. The resident complained that the facility staff administered their seizure medications late.On 3/10/2026 at 9:30 AM, a review of the Medication Administration Audit was conducted. The audit revealed that Levetiracetam oral tablet 1000 mg, an anticonvulsant, was ordered to be given by mouth on 3/1/2026 at 9 PM and was given on 3/2/2026 at 9:24 AM by Staff #26. Lamotrigine oral tablet 150 mg, an anticonvulsant, was ordered to be given on 3/6/2026 at 5 PM and was given on 3/6/2026 at 8:25 PM by Staff #27. Levetiracetam oral tablet 1000 mg was ordered to be given by mouth on 3/7/2026 at 9 PM and was given on 3/7/2026 at 10:15 PM by Staff #18.Lamotrigine is a time-sensitive medication that requires strict adherence to a specific dosing and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-10 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide residents' food in accordance with the resident's preferences. This was evident for 2 (Resident #8 and #39) out 4 residents reviewed for dining during the annual survey. The findings include:1). On 3/06/2026 at 12:48 PM, Resident #8's lunch meal was observed. The surveyor noted that the portions of meals were regular. The lunch meal ticket was reviewed and indicated that the resident was to be served large portions. On 3/06/2026 at 12:50 PM, a brief interview with Resident #8 was conducted. They reported that the meal ticket do not match what is served. When asked how often it occurred, the resident replied, so many times.On 3/06/2026 at 1:22 PM, an interview with the Staff #25, the facility's Food Director, was conducted. The surveyor showed Staff #25 the meal portions served to Resident #8. When asked if the portions were considered large as indicated on the meal ticket, the staff confirmed that the food portions served were regular and not large. 2). On 3/06/2026 at 12:52…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food products in accordance with professional standards for food safety. This was evident in 3 out of 3 food storage areas observed during the initial Kitchen tour.The findings include:On 3/03/2026 at 7:43 AM, an initial tour of the kitchen with the Food Service Director was conducted. A Turkey Gravy Mix was observed without an expiration date, though the received date of 2/23/2026 was printed on it. Other non-perishable items without expiration dates included a bottle of maple syrup. Perishable items found without expiration dates included 1 bag of frozen corn dogs, 1 bag of frozen meatballs, and a container of garlic. 4 bags of bread rolls, each containing about 12 rolls, were observed with an expiration date of 2/26/2026. A bottle of Teriyaki sauce had an expiration date of November 2025. A container of peeled boiled eggs had an expiration date of 2/26/2026. The Food Service Director threw out all expired items.On 3/03/2026 at 7:45 Am, during the brief tour of the fridge, the surveyor…
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 · D2024-12-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility reported incident investigation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to 1) report an alleged violation (elopement) within 2 hours to the regulatory agency, the Office of Health Care Quality and 2) report an allegation of abuse in a timely manner to the state agency, immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation is made. This was evident for 2 residents (#83 and #98) of 2 residents reviewed for timely reporting an alleged violation during a recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score is a number between 0 and 15 that indicates a person's cognitive health: 13-15 points: The person's cognition is intact; 8-12 points: The person has moderate cognitive impairment; 0-7 points: The person has severe cognitive impairment. Elopement occurs when a resident leaves the premises or a safe area without authorization (i.e., an order for discharge or leave of absence) and/or any necessary supervision to do so. A resident who leaves a safe area may be at risk of (or has…
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 · D2024-12-11 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide 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 medical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility staff failed to notify the resident/resident representative (RP) in writing of a transfer/discharge of a resident along with the reason for the transfer. This was evident for 1 (#65) of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization during a recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: During an initial screen of Resident #65 on 12/5/2024 at 7:51 AM, the resident stated that s/he was recently hospitalized . On 12/5/2024 at 8:48 AM a review of nurses' progress notes and change in condition documentation dated 12/1/2024 at 7:16 AM revealed Resident #65 was sent to the ER (emergency room) via 911 on 12/1/2024 for altered mental status. However, there was no documentation/evidence that the resident and/or daughter was notified in writing the reason for transfer to the hospital. On 12/5/2024 at 9:15 AM an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #14). Regarding written notification of reason for transfer to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 20 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-11 · 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 medical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility staff failed to notify the resident/resident representative in writing of the bed-hold policy upon transfer of a resident to an acute care facility. This was evident for 1 (#65) of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization during a recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: The bed-hold policy describes the facility's policy of holding or reserving a resident's bed while the resident is absent from the facility for therapeutic leave or hospitalization. During an initial screen of Resident #65 on 12/5/2024 at 7:51 AM, the resident stated that s/he was recently hospitalized . On 12/5/2024 at 8:48 AM a review of nurses' progress notes revealed a change in condition documentation dated 12/1/2024 at 7:16 AM that noted Resident #65 was sent to the ER (emergency room) via 911 on 12/1/2024 for altered mental status. Further review of the change in condition form revealed Resident #65's daughter was present at time of transfer…
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 · D2024-12-11 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and observation, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide an activities program to meet the needs and preferences of residents by 1) not performing activities with residents per care plan and 2) not documenting care plan activities. This was evident for 1 resident (Resident #31) reviewed during the Medicare/Medicaid recertification survey. The findings include: On 12/04/24 at 11:29 AM, during a phone interview with Resident #31's mother, she told the surveyor that Resident #31 had activities as part of his/her care plan, but the activity staff had not seen him/her. On 12/06/24 at 9:01 AM, the surveyor reviewed the electronic record for the resident and the care plan showed that Resident #31 had little, or no activity involvement related to physical limitations initiated on 05/06/2022, the goal was that Resident #31 will participate in activities of choice while in the room due to physical limitations and was revised on: 08/06/2024 with a target date of 11/30/2024. It also showed the intervention which was that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-11 · 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
Based on observations, medication record review and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to direct a resident (#45) to rinse their mouth after the administration of an inhaler as ordered by the physician. This occurred for one (Resident #45) of four residents observed during a medication observation during the recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: During medication observation on 12/10/24 at 9:22am, LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) staff #16 administered Trelegy inhalation to Resident #45. Trelegy is a prescription medicine used long term to treat COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). Review of the medical record on 12/10/24 at 10:39am revealed a physician order dated 12/5/24 to administer Trelegy one inhalation Inhale orally (by mouth) one time a day for COPD. Rinse mouth after use. Staff #16 failed to instruct resident #45 to rinse his/her mouth after the inhalation of the Trelegy. During interview with the Director of Nursing on 12/10/24 at 12noon she verified the findings. She stated the nurse realized her error and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-11 · 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
Based on a facility reported incident, medical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide adequate supervision to a resident to prevent unsafe wandering/elopement. This was evident for 2 (#98, #29) of 2 residents reviewed for elopement during a recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: Elopement occurs when a resident leaves the premises or a safe area without authorization (i.e., an order for discharge or leave of absence) and/or any necessary supervision to do so. A resident who leaves a safe area may be at risk of (or has the potential to experience) heat or cold exposure, dehydration and/or other medical complications, drowning, or being struck by a motor vehicle A Wander guard bracelet is used to keep residents at risk of wandering/elopement comfortable and protected. It is discreet yet powerful, it triggers alarms and can lock monitored doors to prevent the resident leaving unattended. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score is a number between 0 and 15 that indicates a person's cognitive health:…
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 before2024-12-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of records and interview with facility staff and resident, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care services for residents by failing to implement the physician order for a resident with tracheostomy. This was evident for 1 resident (Resident #54) reviewed for respiratory care during the Medicare/Medicaid recertification survey. The findings include: On 12/04/24 at 08:46 AM, during the initial tour of the facility, Resident #54 complained to the surveyor that his/her Passy-Muir valveSpeaking Valve (A Passy-Muir valve is a medical device that helps tracheostomy and ventilator patients communicate and maintain their airway) had not been changed since he/she got to the facility about one year ago. He/She added that he/she had a prescription from the Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) physician for a speaking valve since April 2024 and another prescription for the same valve and a tracheostomy collar in November 2024, but the facility had not replaced it. He/She provided a copy of the prescription to the surveyor. On 12/06/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-11 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow up with pharmacy recommendations after the monthly reviews were completed. This was evident for 2 (#56 and #10) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications during the recertification/complaint survey. The Findings include: Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) evaluation is a 12-item rating evaluation scale use to assess the severity of abnormal movements which is a side effect of certain antipsychotic medications. On 12/5/24 at 9:36 AM: Review of Resident #56's monthly pharmacy review from September to December 2024 revealed that the pharmacist found some irregularities in September, November and December. Further review showed that September and November recommendation forms could not be found. The Director of Nursing (DON) was asked to provide the reports. On 12/5/24 at 9:46 AM Review of the Pharmacy Drug regimen review from January to December 2024 for resident #10 revealed irregularities for the months of August, October and December, the facility provided the December…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigate the allegation of misappropriation of property for a resident. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #7) selected for review of misappropriation of property and 1 of 40 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: The purpose of a thorough investigation is first to determine if abuse or misappropriation of property of the resident has occurred. It is the expectation that any allegation of abuse or misappropriation of property be investigated by the facility. This investigation includes interviews with all direct caregivers and staff for the reported allegation. Surveyor review of investigation of MD00132711 on 11/7/19 at 9:00 AM revealed that on 10/18/18, Resident #7 was missing $960.00 from his/her room. Resident #7 indicated the $960.00 was in the dresser drawer, in his/her pant pocket. Resident #7 informed the facility staff that the money went missing from his/her room between 8:30 AM and 10:30 AM on 10/18/19, and that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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
Based on resident interview, medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to conduct an accurate, comprehensive assessment for a resident with dental complaints. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for dental care issues during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) is part of the Resident Assessment Instrument that was Federally mandated in legislation passed in 1986. The MDS is a set of assessment screening items employed as part of a standardized, reproducible, and comprehensive assessment process that ensures each resident's individual needs are identified, that care is planned based on these individualized needs, and that the care is provided as planned to meet the needs of each resident. In an interview with Resident #4 on 11/05/19 at 1:17 PM, Resident #4 stated that s/he had not seen a dentist or been offered to see a dentist since being admitted to the facility in 2013. Resident #4 also stated that she/he has a broken tooth on his/her lower right side that has…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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
Based on reviews of a medical record and staff interview, it was determined that the facility nursing staff failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan regarding: 1) a resident's pain management and anxiety and 2) a resident's medical diagnosis. This was evident for 2 of 7 residents (Residents #59 and #40) reviewed for unnecessary medications during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It is used to plan, assess and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care. 1. A review of Resident #59's medical record on 11/14/19 at 10:00 AM revealed a physician's order, dated 07/24/19, that instructed the nursing staff to administer the pain medication Morphine, 5 mg (milligrams), every 2 hours as needed for moderate to severe chronic pain level of 4-10, maximum daily amount 60 mg. Further review of Resident #59's medical record on 11/14/19 failed to reveal a care plan that addressed Resident #59's chronic pain and nursing interventions to help alleviate Resident #59's pain. In an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · 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
Based on observation, reviews of a medical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to: 1) obtain a physician order for the continued use of an abdominal binder, and 2) revise a comprehensive care plan for the use of an abdominal binder that listed specific nursing interventions for the care of Resident's skin and the application and removal of an abdominal binder. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #50) reviewed for care planning during an annual recertification survey. The Findings: A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It is used to plan, assess and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care. During an observation of Resident #50 lying in his/her bed on 11/05/19 at 10:39 AM revealed that Resident #50 had the application of an abdominal binder to his/her person. In an interview with the facility Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 11/06/19 at 1:19 PM, the ADON stated that Resident #50 has an abdominal binder on for his/her abdominal hernia and that the staff were just monitoring abdominal…
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 before2019-11-14 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide a resident with the highest practicable well-being of care and the facility staff failed to follow physician orders as written for daily dressing change to the left stump. This was evident for 1 of 40 residents (Resident #7) selected for review during the survey process. The findings include: Medical record review on 11/6/19 at 9:00 AM for Resident #7 revealed that on 10/16/19 the physician ordered: cleanse left stump with soap and water, pat dry, apply dry dressing cover and secure with tape, every day for wound care. Surveyor observation of Resident #7 on 11/06/19 09:24 AM, revealed the date on Resident's #7 left stump dressing was last changed on 11/1/19. The facility staff failed to change Resident #7's dressing daily as ordered by the physician. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 11/6/19 at 9:30 AM revealed the facility staff failed to provide Resident #7 with daily dressing change as ordered by the physician.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing 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 medical record review and interview, the facility failed to provide treatment/services to maintain vision. This is evident for 1 out of 40 residents (Resident #7) selected for review during the investigation stage of the survey process. The findings include: During an interview with Resident #7 on 11/6/19 at 9 AM, the resident stated he/she was waiting for an appointment with the eye doctor. The resident stated: I can't see; my glasses were broken a while ago. Review of the resident's medical record on 11/7/19 at 12:00 PM revealed the resident inventory sheet of personal belongings included a pair of eyeglasses when the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and the MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment on 08/12/19, revealed Section B Hearing, Speech and Vision was coded that the resident did have adequate vision with corrective lenses. Further review of the medical record revealed an eye doctor's appointment was never scheduled. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 11/7/19 12:43 PM confirmed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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 observation, medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications. This was evident for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #318 and Resident #3) selected for review of unnecessary mediations and 2 of 40 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1. Medical record review on 11/12/19 at 12:00 PM for Resident #318 revealed on 8/2/19 the physician ordered: Ciprofloxacin 250 milligrams by mouth 2 times a day for UTI (urinary tract infection) prophylaxis (prevention). Ciprofloxacin is used to treat a variety of bacterial infections. Ciprofloxacin belongs to a class of drugs called quinolone antibiotics. It works by stopping the growth of bacteria. Physicians often prescribe Ciprofloxacin for residents with UTIs, as these infections are usually bacterial and respond well to this drug. The usual process is for the physician to order a urinalysis, culture and sensitivity for the resident. A urinalysis is a test of the urine. A urinalysis is used to detect and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to conduct AIMs testing on a resident. This was evident for 1 of 40 residents (Resident #6) selected for review during the survey process. The findings include: The Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) is a rating scale that was designed in the 1970's to measure involuntary movements known as tardive dyskinesia (TD). TD is a disorder that sometimes develops as a side effect of long-term treatment with neuroleptic (antipsychotic) medications. Tardive dyskinesia is a syndrome characterized by abnormal involuntary movements of the patient's face, mouth, trunk, or limbs, which affects 20%-30% of patients who have been treated for months or years with neuroleptic medications. Persons taking any kind of antipsychotic medication need to be monitored for movement disorders. The AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) aids in the early detection of tardive dyskinesia as well as providing a method for on-going surveillance. Medical record review on 11/12/19 at 7:30 AM for Resident #6 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to properly store medications. This was observed twice during an annual recertification survey. The findings: The first observation was made on 11/08/19 at 11:00 AM outside room [ROOM NUMBER]. The surveyor observed one unattended and unlocked respiratory therapy supply cart. A respiratory therapy supply cart holds supplies and medications for the resident's residing on the facility's specialized ventilator care unit. No respiratory therapy nor nursing staff members were attending to the respiratory therapy supply cart at the time of the observation. The respiratory therapy manager was immediately made aware of finding and locked the open medication cart. The second observation was made on 11/14/19 at 9:25 AM outside room [ROOM NUMBER]. The surveyor observed one unattended medication cart that had 2 pill medications seated on top of the medication cart. A medication cart holds the medications for the resident's residing in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to obtain laboratory blood specimen and urinalysis for Resident (#318). This was evident for 1 of 40 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1A. The facility staff failed to obtain a routine urinalysis and culture and sensitivity for Resident #318. Medical record review on 11/12/19 at 12:00 PM for Resident #318 revealed on 8/5/19 the physician ordered: urinalysis, culture and sensitivity. A urinalysis is a test of the urine. A urinalysis is used to detect and manage a wide range of disorders, such as urinary tract infections, kidney disease and diabetes. A urinalysis involves checking the appearance, concentration and content of urine. A urine culture is a method to grow and identify bacteria that may be in the urine. Bacteria are germs that cause infections. The sensitivity test helps caregivers pick the best medicine to treat the infection if one is detected. Further record review and interview with the Director of Nursing on 11/13/19 at 11:30 AM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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
Based on resident interview, medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to take steps to obtain dental services for a resident with complaints of missing teeth and difficulty chewing. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for dental care issues during an annual recertification survey. The findings: In an interview with Resident #4 on 11/05/19 at 1:17 PM, Resident #4 stated that s/he had not seen a dentist or been offered to see a dentist since being admitted to the facility in 2013. Resident #4 also stated that she/he has a broken tooth on his/her lower right side that has been there for a while. Resident #4 also stated that s/he would like to see a dentist. Resident #4 stated that s/he has no teeth on his/her upper ridge which makes it hard to eat some foods that are too hard or too tough to chew. Review of Resident #4's nursing documentation and assessments 11/12/19 at 10:00 AM revealed an annual MDS assessment was completed with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 08/10/19. The assessment failed to capture…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0836 — isolatedEnsure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to maintain confidential information located in a medication cart computer. This was observed twice during an annual recertification survey. The findings: The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) Privacy Rule is the first comprehensive Federal protection for the privacy of personal health. The HIPPA Privacy Rule establishes national standards to protect individuals' medical records and other personal health information and applies to health plans, health care clearinghouses, and those health care providers that conduct certain health care transactions electronically. The Rule requires appropriate safeguards to protect the privacy of personal health information and sets limits and conditions on the uses and disclosures that may be made of such information without patient authorization. The Rule also gives patients' rights over their health information, including rights to examine and obtain a copy of their…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on reviews of administrative records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to take steps to provide staff education to all Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) staff members regarding the care of ventilator dependent residents. This was evident for 3 of 6 GNA staff members (GNA #28, #29. #30) reviewed during the survey. The findings: The facility assessment will enable each nursing home to thoroughly assess the needs of its resident population and the required resources to provide the care and services the residents need. It should serve as a record for staff and management to understand the reasoning for decisions made regarding staffing and other resources and may include the operating budget necessary to carry out facility functions. A review of the facility assessment on 11/06/19 under section A.1. Resident Population revealed that the facility is able to except out of state residents that require the uses of ventilators. Reviews of other administrative records revealed that the facility is dually certified to accept up to 32 ventilator dependent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on reviews of a medical record and staff interview, it was determined that the nursing staff failed to maintain an accurate medical record by not documenting the administration of a narcotic pain medication 11 times in the resident's medical record (Resident #59 and not documenting a complete and accurate diagnoses list for Resident #40. This was evident for 2 of 7 residents (Resident #59 and #40) reviewed for unnecessary medications during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: 1. A medical record is the official documentation for a healthcare organization. As such, it must be maintained in a manner that follows applicable regulations, accreditation standards, professional practice standards, and legal standards. All entries to the record should be legible and accurate. A review of Resident #59's medical record on 11/14/19 at 10:00 AM revealed a physician's order, dated 07/24/19, that instructed the nursing staff to administer the pain medication Morphine, 5 mg (milligrams), every 2 hours as needed for moderate to severe chronic pain level of 4 - 10, with a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
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 | 5 of 5 | 3.1 | +1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 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 MD5 OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/01/2023 |
| PC MD5 TOPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2023 |
| SMS 2021 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2023 |
| DES CAPITAL LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| JRK INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| KLUGMAN, JACOB | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| STEIN, SHALOM | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| STERNBUCH, DANIEL | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| BHARAJ, NARENDER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| COX, VICKIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| MANSFIELD, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| SILVERBERG, NISANEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| WADE, KAHLIL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/12/2023 |
| WILLIS, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| SCHONFELD, AKIVA | Individual | TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ADESSE HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ADESSE MD PEACE MD5 PROPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ADESSE MD5 PROPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ANNAPOLIS MD PROPCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| HC FAMILY TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| MD 4 PROPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| PEACE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
12 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.
About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $605K 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 MD
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 Maryland 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 215005. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-10, 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.