No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Ginger Cove

4000 River Crescent Drive, Annapolis, MD 21401 · Non profit - Other · 55 certified beds · (410) 266-7300 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (410) 266-7300 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Nov 2025
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2600 Solomons Island Rd · (410) 990-0050 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
CarePlus0.9 mi
2666 Riva Rd · (800) 746-7287 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2504 Solomons Island Rd · (410) 573-9700 · Call to confirm hours
Park
11 Homeport Dr · (410) 222-7300 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased29.3%20.4%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight9.6%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.4%0.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.7%1.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%22.8%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury9.4%2.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.9%22.2%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.2%16.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.4%5.9%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.7%25.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table17.8%13.8%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.8%1.1%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.9%80.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.9%21.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit20.1%9.8%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.241.331.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.071.201.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

36.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 37 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

36.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
28.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.55U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.21hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 28.1% 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 32 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF36.5%CMS range 25.0–50.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.6%CMS range 6.4–16.910.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge28.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge31.2%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge15.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened9.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.0%CMS range 4.7–16.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.681.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

1.50
RN hours/ resident / day
0.89
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.29
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.68
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.16
RN hoursweekends
43.1%
Total nursing turnover
36.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 55 beds and averages 40.5 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 14 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 4.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.50 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.29 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 4.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.81 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.64 to 1.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-24)
9
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-04)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-24 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to report an allegation of misappropriation of property in a timely manner. This was evident in 1 out of 3 facility reported incidents reviewed during the recertification survey. The findings include: On 11/20/2025 at 2:08 PM, a review of incident #347813 was conducted. The facility reported that Resident #43's family member alleged that the facility misplaced Resident #43's ring. On 11/21/2025 at 11:08 AM, a review of the facility's investigation was conducted. The facility was made aware of the missing ring on 3/26/2025 and the facility made the initial report to Office of Health Care Quality on 4/3/2025. On 11/21/2025 at 12:02 PM, an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted. This surveyor questioned the DON on the submission dates for Incident #347813. The DON acknowledged the delay in reporting in a timely manner and stated that the facility realized on 4/3/2025 that the incident should have been reported within 24 hours…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor 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

    Based on observation and interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents had a homelike environment. This was evident for 3 (#21, #34, and #39) of 16 residents reviewed during the initial pool process. The findings include: An observation of Resident #21's room on 5/28/24 at 12:29 PM revealed the walls on the right side of the hallway had 7 or more black marks varying from light to dark and measuring from 3-12 inches in length. In the bathroom the shower stall had grip strips that were partially peeled up. An observation of Resident #34's room on 5/28/24 at 12:06 PM revealed on the left side of the hallway there were multiple black marks varying from light to dark and measured between 47 inches to 3 inches in length and between the second and third picture hanging in the hallway there were 2 circular black marks measuring about 2 ½ inches. There were black marks on the right side of the hallway between the closet door and the corner wall. The door to the bathroom had two holes the size of a nail head on the right side. Inside the bathroom was a shower stall…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide 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

    Based on medical record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to have a process in place to ensure that residents and resident representatives received a notice of transfer in writing. (Resident #40 and #246). This was evident in 2 of 3 residents reviewed for hospitalization during the survey. The findings include: 1. Review of Resident #40's medical record on 5/29/24 revealed the Resident was transferred to the hospital on 1/9/24. Further review of Resident #40's medical record revealed the Resident had 2 physician certifications of incapacity. Review of the facility's hospital transfer documents on 5/29/24 revealed no written notification to the Resident's representative of the transfer to the hospital on 1/9/24. On 6/3/24 at 11:05 AM, Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the facility staff failed to provide written notification to Resident #40's Representative of transfer to the hospital on 1/9/24. 2. An attempt to review the electronic medical record (EMR) on 5/31/24 at 10:30 AM revealed Resident #246 could not be viewed by 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0625 — isolated
    Notify 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

    Based on record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to have a process in place to ensure that residents and resident representatives received the bed hold policy in writing within 24 hours after being sent to the hospital (Resident #40 and #246). This was evident for 2 of 3 resident records reviewed for hospitalization during an annual survey. The findings include: Bed hold notice includes providing written information to the resident; and bed charges, including the duration, during which the resident is permitted to return and resume residence in the nursing facility. 1. Review of Resident #40's medical record on 5/29/24 revealed the Resident was transferred to the hospital on 1/9/24. Further review of Resident #40's medical record revealed the Resident had 2 physician certifications of incapacity. Review of the facility's hospital transfer documents on 5/29/24 revealed no evidence that the Resident or representative received a bedhold notice on 1/9/24. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 6/3/24 at 11:05 AM confirmed the facility staff failed…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to have a process in place to ensure that a baseline care plan was provided to the resident and resident representative within 48 hours of admission to the facility (Resident #40 and #42). This was evident for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for baseline care plans during an annual survey. The findings include: The baseline care plan is given to residents within 48 hours of their admission and details a variety of components of the care that the facility intends to provide to that resident. In addition to the baseline care plan, residents are also expected to receive a list of their admission medications. This allows residents and their representatives to be more informed about the care that they receive. 1. Review of Resident #40's medical record on 5/29/24 revealed the Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from the hospital and the facility staff developed a baseline care plan on 1/5/24. Further review of Resident #40's medical…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop 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 medical record review and interview with the resident and staff it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure residents' plans of care included individual resident care needs and interventions to assist each resident in reaching their highest practicable level of wellbeing. This was evident for 1 (#10) of 1 resident reviewed for Dialysis. 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. In an interview on 5/29/24 at 10:36 AM, Resident #10 revealed he/she received dialysis 3 times per week. When asked if he/she was on a specialized diet he/she indicated yes but did not know what it involved. Resident #10 also stated he/she was on a fluid restriction but didn't know what the restriction was. Review of Resident #10's medical record on 6/3/24 at 9:37 AM revealed physicians' orders which included but were not limited to a diet order for: Regular diet, regular texture, thin liquids, renal precautions. No citrus fruit or juices; no bananas, no…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and interview with staff it was determined the facility staff 1) failed to measure resident centered objectives in order to determine the effectiveness of the residents care plan interventions; (Resident #10) and 2) failed to ensure resident's care plan reviews were completed by an interdisciplinary team which included the attending physician, a registered nurse and nurse aide involved in the resident's care, a member of food and nutrition services staff and the resident/representative; (Resident #10) and 3) failed to hold quarterly care plan meetings to include the interdisciplinary team, resident and resident's representative for residents. (Resident #40). This was evident for 2 out of 5 residents reviewed for care planning during an annual survey. The findings include: Once the facility staff completes an in-depth assessment (MDS) of the resident, the interdisciplinary team meet and develop care plans. A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0661 — isolated
    Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
    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 ensure that a discharge summary was complete and accurate. This was evident for 1 (#42) of 3 closed records reviewed. The findings include: A medical record review for Resident #42 on 5/30/24 at 11:18 AM revealed a history and physical visit conducted by the attending physician on the day of the resident's admission. The physician noted that the resident had progressing weakness, reoccurring falls, Parkinson's disease, and worsening dementia. The plan for treatment was noted as physical and occupational therapy, continue the same mediations, and repeat labs. The physician noted that the resident's potential for rehab was fair, and the resident had a poor prognosis. A review of the discharge summary revealed that the physician documented the resident had completed their course of treatment and was being discharged back to independent living with family. The physician failed to include the medications that the resident was on and which one that should be continued after discharged . An interview…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop 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 record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure all residents were offered and/or receive the appropriate pneumococcal vaccinations as per the national standards. This was evident for 2 (#21 and #34) of 5 residents reviewed for pneumococcal vaccinations. The findings include: The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) releases an Adult Immunization Schedule which assist healthcare workers in determining the vaccinations that are recommended for their residents. CDC released a Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) on January 28, 2022, with further guidance for determining which pneumococcal vaccination is recommended based on previous vaccinations. Pneumococcal vaccinations are available in a formulation of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PVC) followed by the number of strands of pneumonia it protects against and a 23 - valent pneumococcal polysaccharide…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-06-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop 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 observation, medical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for ADL's 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. An observation was made of Resident #36 on 06/05/19 at 2:44 PM sitting in his/her room watching television and seated next to his/her companion. The surveyor attempted to speak to Resident #36 but Resident #36 was having difficulty hearing the questions and had to ask his/her companion to repeat the surveyor's questions. Resident #36's companion indicated Resident #36 did not have his/her hearing aids in. In interview with Staff #3 on 06/05/19 at 2:50 PM, she/he indicated Resident #36 should have his/her hearing aids applied each morning. Staff #3 checked the medicine cart and Resident #36's hearing aids were still present 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-06-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide 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 observation, medical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to follow a physician order and insert a resident's hearing aids daily at 8 am. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for ADL's during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: An observation was made of Resident #36 on 06/05/19 at 2:44 PM sitting in his/her room watching television and seated next to his/her companion. The surveyor attempted to speak to Resident #36 but Resident #36 was having difficulty hearing the questions and had to ask his/her companion to repeat the surveyor's questions. Resident #36's companion indicated Resident #36 did not have his/her hearing aids in. In interview with Staff #3 on 06/05/19 at 2:50 PM, she/he indicated Resident #36 should have his/her hearing aids applied each morning. Staff #3 checked the medicine cart and Resident #36's hearing aids were still present in the medication cart. A review of Resident #36's ADL (activities of daily living) care plan revealed a nursing intervention instructing 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2024-06-04 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observations, a review of daily staffing records, and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to post the total number and actual hours worked by categories of Registered nurses, Licensed practical nurses, and Certified nursing aides per shift and in an accurate, clear and readable format. The findings include. Observations on 6/4/24 at 10:30 AM, did not reveal the Federal requirements related to the posting of staff. The total number of and actual hours worked by categories of Registered nurses, Licensed practical nurses, and Certified nursing aides per shift was not observed in any part of the facility Nursing Units. On 6/4/24 at 11 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing and a review of the current posting confirmed that the Staffing record failed to document the total number of hours worked by categories.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
BOULDEN, PHYLLISIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/29/2016
FISHER, DONALDIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/06/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$5.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$2,100per resident / day
operating cost
$63,831per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$338per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Maryland Medicaid page for homes that do.

Typical monthly cost in Maryland
$12,927/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$14,448/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,173/mo
Assisted living

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 215174. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-24, 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.

What to do next