Future Care Sandtown-Winchester
1000 North Gilmore Street, Baltimore, MD 21217 · For profit - Corporation · 148 certified beds · (410) 669-2750 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (15% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2025
- 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 (F0567)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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.
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 | 17.5% | 20.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.9% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| 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 | 0.9% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 14.7% | 22.8% | 6.5% | better 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 | 0.6% | 2.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 30.8% | 22.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 6.4% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.4% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.5% | 5.9% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.6% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.2% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.1% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.7% | 80.6% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.7% | 21.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.6% | 9.8% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.80 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.59 | 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.
56.6% 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 147 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 77.0% 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 74 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 0.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 12% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 | 56.6%CMS range 49.2–63.2 | 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 | 10.6%CMS range 7.7–15.0 | 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 | 77.0% | 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 | 71.6% | 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 | 63.5% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.0% | 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 | 7.4%CMS range 4.3–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.77 | 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 148 beds and averages 141.8 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.77 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 15% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-13 · 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 interviews and record reviews it was determined the facility failed to ensure that staff acknowledged a food preference for a resident. This was found to be evident for 1 (Resident #135) out of 1 Resident reviewed for preferences. The findings include: During an interview conducted on 04/06/2026 at 9 AM, Resident #135 stated that he/she always gets hot cereal (oatmeal) on their tray even though their meal tray ticket lists oatmeal as on of their food dislikes. The resident confirmed that he/she had told multiple staff that he/she did not like oatmeal, but he/she grew tired of voicing their concerns and just ignored the oatmeal on the tray.The survey requested to observe the contents of Resident #135's breakfast tray and the resident consented. The observation revealed, a plate with white toast, scrambled eggs, a bowl with cooked oatmeal and a carton of a vanilla flavored nutritional shake. On 04/08/2026 at 9 AM during interview with Resident #135, the surveyor observed oatmeal on the resident's meal tray. Oatmeal was again listed as a dislike on the resident's meal tray…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-21 · 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 record review and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a physician was notified of laboratory results in a timely manner resulting in a delay in treatment. This was evident for 1 (Resident #4) out of 5 residents reviewed during a complaint survey. The findings include:On 10/20/25 at 8:12 AM review of complaint 2589012 revealed the complainant had stated Resident #4 has had to be transported to the hospital for a UTI (urinary tract infection) on several occasions due to lack of care from the staff. Resident #4's medical record was reviewed on 10/20/25 at 12:01 PM and revealed an order dated 4/29/25, Obtain UA/C & S (urine analysis and culture and sensitivity) to R/O (rule out) UTI on 4/30/25 am. On 10/21/25 at 10:38 AM in an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Regional Clinical Services Manager (RCSM) when asked the protocol/process when a resident was ordered labs, the RCSM stated the nurse put the order into Diamond Lab and then they come and draw/collect it. Then, Diamond Labs uploaded the results into PCC…
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 · E2025-02-06 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
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 that call bells were kept within reach for residents to utilize. This deficient practice was evidenced in 5 (#57, #38, #66, #37 and #152) of 28 residents during the survey. The findings include: 1. On 2/3/2025 at approximately 9:30 AM, during a tour of the facility it was observed in Resident #57's room that the call bell was under the resident's bed. The call bell itself was a regular push-style call button that due to the resident's arm and hand contractures it would be difficult to use. During this tour, GNA #22 was asked where the call bell was. The GNA went to the head of the bed, reached under it and retrieved the call bell and attached it to the resident's bed sheet. The GNA stated that the resident couldn't communicate and wouldn't be able to use it anyway. When asked why they attached it to the bed sheet then, the GNA stated because the call bell was supposed to be within the resident's reach. On 2/3/2025 at approximately 1:00 pm, The Regional Clinical Services Manager #8 was made aware…
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 · E2025-02-06 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — patternHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of administrative records and interviews with staff, it was determined during the investigative phase of the survey, that the facility failed to permit 5 of 5 residents (#45, #72, #78, #67, #77) to access their personal funds. The findings include: On 8/6/2024 a complaint MD00208837 was submitted to the Office of Health Care Quality regarding the ability of the residents to access their personal funds. The surveyor interviewed Staff #52, the Business Office Manager on 2/4/2025 at 1:15 pm who stated that the Administrator, Staff #1 was aware of the need for petty cash to be available to the residents when she was not onsite. She provided The Resident Statements for 5 residents (#45, 72, 78, 67,77), the Surety Bond, a Trial Balance sheet and the Resident Trust fund policy. None of the Resident Statements had withdrawals on weekends or evenings with all transactions occurring Monday through Friday. The surveyor then Interviewed he Staff #1 on 2/4/2025 at 1:30 PM, he stated that there wasn't anyone on the weekends and evenings available to disperse resident funds unless…
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 · E2025-02-06 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely 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 record review and interview it was determined that the facility staff failed to: 1.) report an allegation of abuse to the state agency within the 2-hour allotted timeframe; 2.) report episodes of a resident's falls in a timely manner to the resident representative, physician, and facility administrative staff; 3.) report the results of the final investigation within five working days to the Office of Health Care Quality (OHCQ) This was evident for 2 out of 12 facility reported incidents reviewed, 2 out 4 residents (#134 andResident #40) reviewed intakes during the survey. The findings include: 1. On 02/06/25 at 10:30 am a review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) involving Resident #66 revealed the alleged incident occurred on 01/30/25 during the 3:00 pm - 11:00 pm shift. On 02/06/25 at 12:15 pm the surveyor received a copy of the staffing sheet 01/30/25 for the 3 pm- 11 pm shift and realized the alleged perpetrator's name was not on the assignment sheet. At 12:35 pm the surveyor received the staffing sheet for 7 am - 3 pm shift and the alleged perpetrator's name was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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, it was determined that the facility staff failed to: 1.) have quarterly care plan meetings; 2.) ensure a resident was offered the opportunity to participate in their care planning process by being invited to their care plan meeting; and 3.) complete resident care plan meetings that were prepared and revised by the entire interdisciplinary team. This was evident for: 2 (#37 & #121) of 2 resident records reviewed for care plan meeting, 2 (Resident #10, #39) out of 4 residents investigated for care planning during the survey. The findings include: A care plan is used to summarize a person's health conditions, specific care needs, and current treatments and outlines what needs to be done to plan, assess, and manage care. This helps to evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care. 1. During observation rounds on 01/30/25 at 10:22 am the surveyor asked Resident #121 were participating in the care plan meetings. Resident #121 verbalized they were not having care plan…
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 · E2025-02-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The findings include: 1) During observation rounds with Director of Food Service staff #7 on 01/29/25 at 07:56 AM, the kitchen's dry goods storage room was observed to have sealed bins of flour, sugar, rice, and food thickener; canned beets and banana pudding; and bags of croutons without expiration dates labeled on them. During observation rounds with Director of Food Service on 01/29/25 at 08:09 AM, the kitchen's refrigerator was observed to have 9 Imperial chocolate shake cartons without expiration or a used by dates labeled on them. On 01/29/25 at 12:20 PM, the facility's Manufactured Food without Provided Use by Dating policy was reviewed. The facility's Manufactured Food without Provided Use by Dating policy states that when the facility receives manufactured products without a printed Use-By date on the original packaging, the facility will label and date the product, so it clearly shows a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide an environment that promotes resident respect and dignity. This was evident for 2 (Resident #10 and #34) out of 4 residents reviewed for dignity during the survey. The findings include: 1. On 1/30/2025 at 9:15AM, the Surveyor conducted an interview with Resident #10 in his/her room. The resident informed the Surveyor that if he/she must try to get all of his/her cares done on the 3PM-11PM shift because the nursing staff will not check on him/her or answer the call bell overnight. If the resident has a bowel movement or urinates in their diaper from 11PM-6AM, that he/she has to sit in it until someone does rounds after 6AM. BIMS stands for Brief Interview for Mental Status, a cognitive screening tool used to assess a person's mental status and scored from 0-15. During a review of Resident #10's electronic medical record, the Surveyor discovered that the resident had a BIMS score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review revealed the resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, it was determined that that facility staff failed to give residents the option of getting dressed and out of bed. This deficient practice was evidenced in 2 (Resident #37 and #50) assessed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) choices during the survey. The findings include: During observation rounds on 01/29/24 at 9:20 am the surveyor observed Resident #37 in bed with a gown on. The resident verbalized he/she would like to get dressed and out of bed. At 9:36 am the surveyor observed Resident #50 in bed and the resident verbalized they are not able to get out of bed and get dressed. On 02/06/25 at 4:39 pm the surveyor made Director of Nursing (DON) #2 aware Resident's #37 & Resident #50 had been undressed and in bed every weekday during the past week. During an interview with DON #2 they verbalized the staff are expected to ask the residents if they want to get dressed and get out of bed. If the resident refuses the nurse should be made aware and a note should be written as it's the preference of the resident. There was no documentation to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview with staff, the facility failed to ensure that a current copy of a resident's advance directive was in the resident's medical record and that every resident had the opportunity to execute an advanced directive. This was evident for 2 (Residents #7 and #46 ) out of 8 residents investigated for advanced directives during the survey. The findings include: Maryland Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) is a form which includes medical orders for emergency medical services or other medical personnel regarding CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) and other life-sustaining treatment options. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a lifesaving technique used in emergencies in which someone's breathing or heartbeat has stopped. Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) is an order placed in a person's medical record by a doctor informs the medical staff that CPR should not be attempted. Advance directive is a written instruction, such as a living will or durable power of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and facility record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide residents with a homelike environment in good repair. This was evident for resident bathrooms observed during the survey. The findings include: On 01/29/25 at 08:28 AM during observation rounds, room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom was observed to have a cracked toilet seat. On 01/29/25 at 08:37 AM during observation rounds, room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom was observed to have cracked caulking around the bathroom sink where it meets the wall. On 01/29/25 at 08:44 AM during observation rounds, room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom was observed to have a hole in the wall behind the toilet, the cove base was separated and peeling from the wall, and the wall directly in front of the toilet had large pieces of dry wall missing. On 02/04/25 at 09:34 AM, the facility's pest control records were reviewed. The facility's pest control records revealed that when Orkin Pest Control services treated the facility on 02/03/25, they recommended…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, medical record reviews, and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from neglect and failed to notify the medical staff, the facility administrative staff, and the resident's representative of a resident's change in condition in a timely manner. This was found to be true for 1 of 1 (#134) investigated for neglect during the survey. The findings include: On 01.30.25 at 3:00 PM the surveyor reviewed the complaint MD00197046 submitted to OHCQ on 09.18.23. The complainant addressed the late notification by the facility to the resident representative related to resident # 134's fall on 09.08.23 and delay in immediate care status post a fall. On 01.31.25 at 09:45 AM the regional district RN #17 provided the surveyor with the facility incident documents related to resident # 134. On one page of the hard copy facility incident report Resident had a fall on 09.08.23 without complaint of pain/visible injury was written by the director of nursing (DON). with a date of 09.10.23. Further review of the facility incident report included 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 · D2025-02-06 · 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 interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to complete a thorough investigation of an allegation of abuse. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (#66) of 1 Facility Reported Incident (FRI) reviewed during the survey. The findings include: On 02/06/25 at 10:30 am a review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) involving Resident #66 revealed the alleged incident occurred on 01/30/25 during the 3:00 pm - 11:00 pm shift. The surveyor requested and received a copy of the staffing sheets for Unit #5 when the alleged incident occurred. On 02/06/25 at 12:15 pm review of the staffing sheet 01/30/25 for the 3 pm- 11 pm shift revealed the alleged perpetrator's name was not on the assignment sheet. At 12:35 pm the surveyor received the staffing sheet for 7 am - 3 pm shift and the alleged perpetrator's name was present. Received a copy of Registered Nurse # 37 time sheet for 01/30/25 day shift which revealed he/she clocked out at 4:24 pm. Review of the interviews conducted by Director of Nursing #2 revealed all the staff who worked on Unit #5…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to practice according to professional nursing standards as evidenced by failing to complete a narcotic count prior to their shift and failing to sign the narcotic sheet after completing the narcotic count. This deficient practice was discovered during the survey. The findings include: On 02/04/25 at 1:45 pm the surveyor asked Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #30 who completed the narcotic count with them when their shift started. LPN #30 verbalized the narcotic count was completed with Unit Manager #34. The surveyor looked at the narcotic sign off sheet and did not see Unit Manager #34's name. The surveyor asked who signed the narcotic sheet. LPN #30 verbalized, oh that's right I did the count with Registered Nurse #33. The controlled narcotics sheet was signed by LPN #30 and RN #33. On 02/04/25 at 2:00 pm while on the third floor, the surveyor asked Registered Nurse # 33 who completed the narcotic count. RN #33 verbalized they completed the narcotic count with Registered Nurse #49 on the third 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 · D2025-02-06 · 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 observation, record review, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident had the opportunity to participate in daily activity programs and maintain documentation of resident participation. This was evident for 1 (Resident #10) out of 4 residents investigated for activities during the survey. The findings include: On 1/30/2025 at 9:08AM, the Surveyor conducted an interview with Resident #10 which revealed that the resident was not offered activities every day. The resident also stated that they used to participate in activities at the facility, but now it takes the staff too long to bring him/her back to their room when ready. BIMS stands for Brief Interview for Mental Status, a cognitive screening tool used to assess a person's mental status and scored from 0-15. During a review of Resident #10's electronic medical record, the Surveyor discovered that the resident had a BIMS score 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review revealed the resident was dependent on nursing staff for activities of daily living…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · 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 and interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to monitor a resident's oxygen saturation as ordered and failed to follow a physician's order for oxygen therapy. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (#80) of 1 resident assessed for oxygen therapy during the survey. The findings include: On 01/29/25 at 9:03 am the surveyor observed Resident #80 in bed receiving 3L of oxygen therapy via NC. On 01/30/25 at 12:58 pm the surveyor observed Resident #80 receiving 3 liters of oxygen (02) therapy via nasal cannula (NC). On 01/31/25 9:29 am a review of the electronic medical record revealed an order was written on 11/24/24 for Resident #80 to receive 3L of oxygen via NC as needed (PRN) for shortness of breath (SOB) and pulse ox below 95%. A review of the resident's medication and treatment administration records for November 24, December 24, and January 25 revealed there was no documentation to support the resident was receiving oxygen therapy. A review of the resident's vital signs revealed the resident's oxygen saturation was not being checked…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · 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 observation and interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure a resident who smokes did not have readily available cigarettes. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (#6) of 1 residents assessed for safe smoking monitoring during the survey. The findings include: On 02/06/25 at 1:17 pm while the surveyor was on Unit #5 the surveyor noticed something on the floor in Resident #6's room. The surveyor walked into the room and observed a cigarette on the floor next to the bed in front of a black tennis shoe. Another cigarette along with unsmoked tobacco was on the floor in the walking path. The surveyor asked Registered Nurse #37 if Resident #6 was supposed to have their cigarettes. Registered Nurse #37 verbalized the resident was care planned for having their cigarettes. Review of Resident #6 care plans revealed, four separate care plans were initiated related to the resident smoking including adhering to the smoking policy. No interventions included monitoring the resident for smoking paraphernalia. On 02/06/25 at 2:50 pm the surveyor reported to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide care, treatment, and appropriate and sufficient services for a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter. This was evident for 2 (Resident #52, #50) of 3 residents reviewed for Urinary Catheters during the survey. The findings include: An indwelling urinary catheter is a thin flexible tube inserted through the urethra into the bladder to drain urine. The catheter is held in the bladder by a water-filled balloon, which prevents it falling out. These types of catheters are often known as Foley catheters. 1. On 1/30/2025 at 11:52AM, during an interview with Resident #52, the Surveyor observed the indwelling catheter bag with cloudy urine, hanging from the side bed frame facing the wall. On 2/3/2025 at 12:56PM, a review of Resident #52's electronic medical record failed to reveal physician orders for an indwelling catheter or for catheter care. The Treatment Administration Record (TAR) had no provision for the staff to sign off the presence of 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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure the controlled substance count was completed and the records were accurate. This was evident for 2 medication carts out of 4 medication carts reviewed during the survey. The findings include: 1. On 02/04/25 at 1:45 pm the surveyor asked Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #30 who completed the narcotic count with them when their shift started. LPN #30 verbalized the narcotic count was completed with Unit Manager #34. The surveyor looked at the narcotic sign off sheet and did not see Unit Manager #34 name. The surveyor asked who signed the narcotic sheet. LPN #30 verbalized, oh that's right I did the narcotic count with Registered Nurse #33. On 02/04/25 at 2:00 pm while on the third floor, the surveyor asked Registered Nurse # 33 who completed the narcotic count. RN #33 verbalized they completed the narcotic count with Registered Nurse #49 on the third and fifth floors. Registered Nurse #33 worked on the fifth floor during the 11 pm - 7 am on 02/03/25. On 02/04/25 at 2:08 pm Director of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · 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 that the facility staff failed to store medication in the refrigerator, discard expired intravenous tubing kits, discard an opened gastrostomy tube, discard expired COVID-19 Rapid Test Kits, and an open vial of medication. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (Unit #5) of 2 medication storage units reviewed during the survey. The findings include: On [DATE] at 1:18 pm the surveyor reviewed the medication storage room on Unit 5. There was a pack of [NAME] cigarettes that belonged to a resident per RN Unit Manager #34 who the cigarettes were given to. A bag of 5 vials of Lorazepam was in the left upper cabinet on the second shelf behind a box. The bag had a label indicating the medication should have been refrigerated. The cap was removed from one vial and the vial was almost empty. The medication was prescribed for Resident #37. An opened package with a gastrostomy tube 14F/5ml was in the cabinet along with two packages of COVID 19 Rapid Test Kits 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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure a resident received dental care. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (#121) of 2 residents assessed for dental care during the survey. The findings include: On 01/30/25 at 10:23 am while speaking with Resident #121 the surveyor noticed the resident had two teeth; one in the right lower quadrant and one in the left lower quadrant. On 01/30/25 at 11:30 am the reported to the management team Resident #121 had poor dentition and asked if the resident had dental care since being admitted to the facility. On 02/03/25 at 8:45 am the surveyor received a copy of Health Drive request for Services/Consultation form for Resident #121. After surveyor intervention, the resident was ordered a consultation for dental care services. On 02/06/25 at 2:56 pm during an interview with Assistant Director of Nursing #3 he/she reported there was a referral process for prophylactic dental measures. The residents are seen but if they have pain or other issues they are referred as well and Long Term Care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · 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 resident interview, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food in accordance with the resident's preferences. This was evident in 1 of 1 (Resident #1) resident selected for review during the survey. The findings include: The surveyor interviewed resident #1 on 2/3/2025 at approximately 12:15 pm regarding their lunch tray. The resident stated that they never got what they wanted to eat. They also stated that I don't get to choose what I want on a daily basis. I was asked what I liked and didn't like when I first got here, but when the food gets to me, it usually nothing like what I said I liked. The surveyor observed the tray and reviewed the dietary slip on the tray. The tray had a very small hot dog on a plain piece of bread with no condiments available. According to the dietary sheet, there was supposed to be steamed broccoli but instead there was zucchini squash, which the resident had identified as a dislike. For dessert the resident had a plain unfrosted piece of cake that on the dietary slip was supposed to be a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices. This was evident for 2 (Resident #10 and Resident #86) out of 34 resident's paper medical record reviewed during the survey. The findings include: On 1/30/2025 at 12:17PM during a review of Resident #10's paper medical record, the Surveyor discovered an Anticoagulation Record form for Resident #86. On 1/30/2025 at 12:20PM, the Surveyor informed Unit Manager (UM) #44 of their observation. UM #44 was unable to explain how Resident #86's document was placed into Resident #10's paper medical record. UM #44 removed Resident #86's Anticoagulation Record form from Resident #10's paper medical record and placed in it the correct medical record for Resident #86.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2020-02-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interviews during the environmental tour. It was determined that the facility staff failed to provide maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior. This is evident for 6 out of 40 residents reviewed during the survey process. The findings include: The facilities Maintenance Director accompanied this surveyor on an environmental tour and verified all of the environmental concerns addressed. On 02/05/20 11:26 AM during Resident #128's interview, it was observed that the bed side tray table was unclean with black stains. The entire tray table was dirty. The exterior door of the same room was observed to have a panel corner of the room's door detaching and in disrepair with a circular shape cut out from the door. On 02/13/20 at 8:34 A.M. during an observation with resident's (R#13, R#38, R#100 and R#111), who share the same bathroom, it was observed on the bathroom interior wall that a hole in the interior bathroom wall was exposed 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 · E2020-02-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff # 9 failed to follow infection control practices, during medication pass on 2/14/20 for Resident # 286. The facility staff also failed to follow infection control practices and guidelines to prevent the development and transmission of disease by failing to store resident care equipment in a sanitary manner for Resident # 72. This was evident for 2 out of 41 residents during the survey process. Findings include: 1. The resident's medical record review was conducted on 2/14/20. Resident #286 was admitted in February 2020. He/SHE has a history of (H/O) smoking. On 2/8/2020 at 6 PM the physician ordered Nicotine step 1 patch 21 mg/24 hr., apply 1 application transdermally one time per day for smoking cessation and remove per schedule. On 2/14/120 at 8:40 AM, during medication pass observation for Resident #286, it was noted that nurse ( RN # 9) took off a Nicotine patch from Resident # 286's left shoulder without gloves on, twisted the patch with her bare hands and later disposed of 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 · D2020-02-18 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately coded. This was evident for 1 (#132) of 5 residents reviewed for hospitalization. The findings include: The MDS (minimum data set) is part of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 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 those individualized needs, and that the care is provided as planned to meet the needs of each resident. A review of the medical record for Resident #132 was conducted on 2/12/20, documents that Resident #132 was discharged to the community/home on [DATE]. A nursing progress note was written on 12/20/19 by a Licensed Practical Nurse indicating that the resident was discharged home with…
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 before2020-02-18 · 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 medical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan, that included measurable objectives to meet the residents medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs. This was evident for 1 (#72) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. 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. The findings include: Review of Resident # 72's care plans on 2/13/20, revealed an intervention was written for a Coronary artery disease problem as Encourage resident to refrain from smoking. This plan of care was created on 5/16/18 and last revised on 9/17/19. Review of the resident's annual comprehensive assessments (9/17/17, 9/18/18 and 9/19/19) indicated that the resident was not a tobacco user. Review of the facility's smoker list did not include Resident #72. Review of the care plan problem Limited physical mobility related to (r/t) Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA) lower extremity…
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 · D2020-02-18 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of daily staffing records, and staff interview 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 failed to have the staff data requirements available in an accurate, clear and readable format. The was identified that the facility did not have staffing information readily available in a readable format for residents and visitors for any given time. The findings include: Tour of the facility on 2/14/20 did not reveal a facility wide staff posting indicating the total number and actual hours worked by categories of Registered nurses (RN), Licensed practical nurses (LPN), and Certified nursing aides (CAN) per shift. It was noted that the facility was posting staffing data/information on the units. On 2/14/20 at 9:40 AM the posting of staffing on the 5th floor was not accurate as the facility used a pre-filled staffing sheets that did not reflect the actual hours worked for the Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA)…
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 · D2020-02-18 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, the facility failed to keep the medication error rate under 5%. A total of 35 med's were given and 2 errors were found which made the med error rate of 5.71 %. According to the regulation, the medication error rate cannot be greater than 5 %. This was evident for 2 (R#286 and R#72) out of 5 residents receiving medication during med pass. The findings include: 1. According to medical record review, Resident # 286 was admitted in February 2020. He/She has a history of (H/O) smoking. On 2/8/2020 at 6 PM the Doctor ordered Nicotine step 1 patch 21 mg/24 hr., apply 1 application transdermally one time per day for smoking cessation and remove per schedule. On 2/14/20 at 8:40 AM, during a med pass observation for Resident #286, it was noted that nurse ( RN # 9) took off a Nicotine patch from Resident # 286's left shoulder without gloves on, twisted the patch with her bare hands and later disposed of the patch into the trash. Immediately after, the same nurse, (RN # 9) without implementing any hand hygiene techniques administered a new Nicotine patch on the right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-18 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to accurately document the respiratory status of Resident #117 . This was evident for 1 Resident investigated during the complaint survey process. The findings include: Resident #117 was placed on Isolation droplet precautions for RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) a viral infection of the respiratory tract that is transmitted through airborne exposure from 01/30/20 until 2/12/20. On 02/12/20 around 02:58 PM, while reviewing the resident's record, it was noted that on 2/2/20 @ 19:36 (7:36 PM) and on 2/10/20 @ 8:16 AM nursing documented that the resident was not on isolation. The Director of Nursing (DON) was made aware.
- Potential for harm · D2018-08-17 · tag F0572 — isolatedGive residents a notice of rights, rules, services and charges.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to inform residents of their rights during their stay at the facility. The findings include: The Surveyor attended a resident council meeting on 8/16/18 at 10:00 AM with 5 residents #72; #47; #78; #31; #26 who regularly attend the monthly resident council meetings. When asked if they were aware of their rights the residents were unclear and stated that no one has ever really told them what their rights are. In an interview with the Activities Director on 8/16/18 at 11:35 AM, who assists residents with facilitating their Resident Council meetings, the surveyor asked if resident rights were presented at the monthly meetings to provide ongoing communication to residents about their rights. The Activities Director confirmed that resident rights are only discussed during the meetings if residents have a specific question or concern regarding one of their rights. Additionally, review of the meeting minutes for February, March, April, May, June and July of 2018 revealed 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 · D2018-08-17 · 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
Based on medical record review and interview with staff it was determined that the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure that the resident and resident's representative were notified in writing of the resident's transfer and the rationale for the transfer. This was found to be evident for 5 out of the 33 (# 50, # 18, # 94, # 116 and # 65) residents reviewed for hospitalization during the investigative portion of the survey. The finding includes: 1. A medical record review for Resident #50 was conducted on 8/16/18 at 8:30 AM. Review of the nursing note written on December 1, 2017 revealed that Resident #50 had a change in their medical condition that required an immediate transfer to an acute care hospital for further evaluation. Review of the medical record failed to reveal any documentation that the resident or the responsible party had been provided with a written notification of the transfer or the rationale for the transfer. 2. A medical record review for Resident # 18 was conducted on 8/16/18 at 8:30 AM. Review of the nursing note written on January 11, 2018…
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 before2018-08-17 · 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 review of medical record and staff interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident # 18. This was evident for 1 of 33 residents reviewed during the investigative portion of the survey. The findings include: A comprehensive care plan is an outline of nursing care showing all the resident's needs and the ways of meeting the needs. It is a dynamic document initiated at admission and subject to continuous reassessment and change by the nursing staff caring for the patient. The care plan typically includes nursing and medical diagnoses, nursing interventions, and outcomes to ensure consistency of care. On 8/14/18 at 12:35 PM an interview with Resident # 18 stated that his/her teeth are broken and painful. A review of Resident # 18's clinical record revealed on 3/21/18 documentation that the resident had dental problems as indicated by broken natural teeth and or likely cavities on the Minimum Data Set (MDS). The MDS is a federally-mandated assessment tool that helps nursing home staff gathers information on each resident's…
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 before2018-08-17 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to review and revise the interdisciplinary care plan to reveal accurate assessment and interventions for Resident (#9). This was evident for 1 of 41 residents reviewed during the survey process. The findings include: The MDS is a federally-mandated assessment tool that helps nursing home staff gather information on each resident's strengths and needs. Information collected drives resident care planning decisions. MDS assessments need to be accurate to ensure each resident receives the care they need. Categories of MDS (Minimum Data Set) are: Cognitive patterns, Communication and hearing patterns, Vision patterns, Physical functioning and structural problems which includes the assessment of range of motion, Continence, Psychosocial well-being, Mood and behavior patterns, Activity pursuit patterns, Disease diagnosis, Other health conditions, Oral/nutritional status, Oral/dental status, Skin condition, Medication use and Treatments and procedures. At the end of the MDS assessment 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 before2018-08-17 · 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 record review and interview, it was determined the facility failed to follow the physicians' order for blood pressures for Resident # 50, and to flush a suprapubic catheter for Resident # 18. This was evident for 2 of 33 residents selected for review during investigation stage of the survey process. The finding includes: 1. Medical record review for Resident # 50 revealed on the 2/05/18 physicians' order: resident to have blood pressures taken on Wednesday. Blood pressure is the strength of your blood pushing against the sides of your blood vessels. Further record review of staff documentation revealed the facility staff failed to follow the physician order and continue to take residents' blood pressure from February 05, 2018 through August 14, 2018. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 08/14/18 at 10:50 AM confirmed the facility staff failed to follow the physician's ordered for Resident # 50. 2. The facility staff failed to flush a suprapubic catheter (SPC). Medical record review for Resident # 18 revealed on the 4/14/18 physicians' order: resident to have SPC flush…
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 · D2018-08-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation and interview with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to asses a resident's reported pain as per the resident's care plan. This was evident during the initial tour and interview process. (Resident #68) The findings include: Interview with Resident #68 on 8/14/18 at 11:40 AM during the initial questioning revealed that s/he does have pain in his/her left thigh. This resident further stated that the staff do medicate him/her, as needed, for pain. Review of the Residents medical record on 8/15/18 at 11:43 AM revealed that the resident has diagnoses to include multiple sclerosis, anemia and chronic pain syndrome. A further review of the residents medical record revealed a care plan in place related to the resident's pain with interventions including to assess the pains location, duration and intensity. A review of the resident's chart failed to show any documentation of pain in the resident's left thigh, or a history of pain in the left thigh. A review of the resident's medication administration record (MAR)…
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 before2018-08-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation staff interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to consistently maintain Resident nourishment, and Medication storage refrigerators at an appropriate temperature. The findings include: Facilities are required to maintain refrigerator temperatures for the safe storage of foods and medications at or below 41 degrees Fahrenheit. On 8/15/18 at 8:50 AM while reviewing the medication storage surveyor observed temperature logs for the medication and resident nourishment refrigerators on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th floors. Review of the 2nd floor log revealed that from 5/29/18 through 8/15/18 a total of 79 days, the temperature was not recorded on either refrigerator on 24 days; the Medication Refrigerator temp was above the safe storage range of 41 degrees on 17 days and the nourishment refrigerator was above 41 degrees on 36 days. Review of the 3rd floor log revealed that from 4/9/18 through 8/15/18 a total of 129 days, the temperature was not recorded on either refrigerator on 37 days; the Medication Refrigerator temp was above the safe storage range of 41…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Ccited before2020-02-18 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — widespreadProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of medical records and staff interviews, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure the safety of Resident #105 and Resident #182, who are cognitively and functionally impaired. This resulted in a forehead, left eyebrow laceration and fracture of the Resident's left nasal bone. This was evident for 1 out of 1 resident's investigated for accidents during the survey. The findings include: Per the medical record Resident #105 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMSs) exam of 3 out of 15, representing severe cognitive impairment. Resident #182 was admitted to the nursing facility on 9/7/18 and had a BIMS of 4 out of 15, representing the same level of impairment as Resident #105. On 1/7/20, a record review indicated that on 3/16/19 at 10:30 PM, Resident #105, walked into Resident #182's room and picked up Resident #182's sneakers. Resident #182 became upset and struck Resident #105 in the head. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 FUTURE CARE/LIFEBRIDGE HEALTH — 18 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 17 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATTMAN FAMILY LTD PRTNSHP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 03/29/1994 |
| POWERS, MARK | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 10% | since 12/01/2025 |
| ALVIN POWERS RESIDUARY TRUST FBO JEFFREY POWERS | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| ALVIN POWERS RESIDUARY TRUST FBO MARK POWERS | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| THE JEFFREY ATTMAN 1994 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 16% | since 03/29/1994 |
| THE SHELLYE ATTMAN GILDEN 1994 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 16% | since 03/29/1994 |
| THE WENDE LEVITAS 1994 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 16% | since 03/29/1994 |
| ATTMAN, LEONARD | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/29/1994 |
| POWERS, JEFFREY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| ATTMAN, GARY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
| FINGLASS, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
| FUTURE CARE HEALTH AND MANAGEMENT CORPORATION | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
| FUTURE CARE HEALTH AND MANAGEMENT OF SANDTOWN-WINCHESTER INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
| OCHUNG, ELIJAH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/14/2024 |
| SPADARO, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/05/2013 |
| ATTMAN, JEFFREY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
| GILDEN, SHELLYE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
| LEVITAS, WENDE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2007 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 33 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in 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 215271. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-02-06, 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.