Sterling Care Bethesda
5721 Grosvenor Lane, Bethesda, MD 20814 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 200 certified beds · (301) 530-1600 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
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- 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 payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 improved from 3 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 | 10.2% | 20.4% | 15.4% | better |
| 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 | 0.1% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 25.0% | 22.8% | 6.5% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.3% | 2.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.9% | 22.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.0% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.4% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 5.9% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 32.7% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.0% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.7% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 47.2% | 80.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.3% | 21.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.9% | 9.8% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.38 | 1.33 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.88 | 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.
41.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 109 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 49.4% 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 87 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 16% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 | 41.8%CMS range 33.5–50.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.5%CMS range 8.1–15.9 | 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 | 49.4% | 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 | 39.1% | 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 | 47.1% | 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 | 98.2% | 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 | 98.8% | 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 | 96.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.7%CMS range 4.4–11.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.10 | 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 200 beds and averages 179.7 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 20 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.08 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.69 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 2.71 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.23 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
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 · D2026-04-27 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate a dependent resident's needs by not ensuring the resident's motorized wheelchair was in working condition. This was evident for 1(Resident #156) of 1 resident reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs during the annual survey.The findings include:Resident #156 whose diagnoses include Quadriplegia, Contracture of the lower legs and Contracture of the left elbow and wrist, was admitted to the facility in 2014.On 4/20/26 at 11:10 AM in an interview Resident #156 stated that their customized motorized wheelchair had been broken for several months, and the facility neither repaired nor provided a substitute motorized wheelchair. As a result, the resident was unable to move around in the facility.The surveyor interviewed the Director of Rehab on 4/21/26 at 2:10 PM. She stated that the wheelchair had been broken since last year. On 09/26/25, the vendor submitted invoices totaling $441.34 for the repairs. However, the facility did not pay the invoices, which resulted in the wheelchair…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-27 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Responsible Party (RP) and/or legal guardian was notified of changes in a resident's condition. This was evident for 2 of 3 changes of conditions reviewed for (Resident #6). The findings include: On 4/20/26 at 11:04 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #6's medical record. The review revealed that Resident #6 was unable to make medical decisions and had a legal guardian established in 2004. Next the surveyor conducted a phone interview with Resident #6's guardian and established the guardian was involved in Resident #6's care planning. On 4/21/26 at 10:22 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #6's change of conditions dated 8/20/25, 11/6/25 and 12/15/25. Only on the 8/20/25 change of condition was Resident #6 guardian documented as notified. On 4/21/26 at 11:44 AM, the surveyor conducted an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON). During the interview the DON confirmed the legal guardian should have been called and updated on the change of conditions. At the time of exit no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-27 · 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 interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment. This was evident for 2 (Chesapeake and Gateway) out of 5 units, rooms (240 and 252) and 1 of 1 driveway observed during the annual survey. The findings include: Adequate lighting means levels of illumination suitable to tasks the resident chooses to perform or the facility staff must perform. 1) On 04/20/26 at 7:05 AM, a flickering light was observed in the hallway by the conference room leading to the Chesapeake unit. The hallway was frequented by residents who traveled to other units, the dining room and the activity room. There was another flickering light observed in a common room at the end of the hall on the unit. When the surveyor arrived at the unit, the floor was in poor condition. The floor was scattered with debris and trash, and a sticky residue was present in multiple areas. On 04/20/26 at 7:17 AM, the surveyor found the bathroom in room [ROOM NUMBER]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to document the reason for hospital transfer and discharge. This deficient practice was evident for two (Resident #195, Resident #197) residents reviewed for inappropriate discharge during the annual survey.The findings include:1. A review of Resident #195's medical records on 04/22/2026, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January 2026. Further review indicated the resident was transferred to the emergency department on 02/20/2026, however, there was no physician note documenting the reason for the transfer. Additional review showed the resident was discharged from the facility on 02/21/2026; however, the medical record lacked physician documentation summarizing the resident's clinical course and care provided. On 04/23/2026 at 9:42 AM, during an interview, the Director of Nursing (DON) #2 explained the facility's transfer and discharge process. She stated; for planned discharges, the physician documents a discharge summary note; however, for residents who are transferred to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the resident's responsible party (RP) with a written bed hold notice upon hospital transfer. This deficient practice was evident for one ( Resident #195) of two residents reviewed for discharge process during the annual survey.The findings include:A review of Resident #195's medical records on 04/22/2026, revealed the resident was transferred to the emergency department on 02/20/2026. Further review indicated the resident's RP was notified of the transfer and verbalized understanding of the bed hold policy; however, the records failed to show evidence that a written copy of the bed hold notice was provided.During an interview on 04/23/26 at 7:54 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #19 stated that when a resident has a change in medical condition requiring a transfer to the hospital, the assigned nurse completes a bed hold notice and transfer notice at that time. If the RP is not present at the time of transfer, a copy is sent to them. The surveyor requested 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 · D2026-04-27 · 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 record review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately document a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in a Resident's medical record. This was found evident of 2 (Resident #23 & #6) of 51 residents reviewed in the survey. The findings include:1) During the surveyors review of Resident #23's MDS assessment on 04/23/2026 at 9:06 AM, no documentation was found of a fall with major injury on the MDS assessments for section J1900 Number of Falls Since Admission/Reentry. On 04/23/2026 at 9:44 AM, the MDS coordinator confirmed that the Fall with Major Injury was not documented in the MDS and a correction would be submitted right away. The Director of Nursing and the Administrator acknowledged the concern on 4/23/2026 at 9:45 AM, stating the correction would be made. 2) On 4/20/26 at 11:04 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #6's medical record. The review revealed that Resident #6 had an Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (section N Medications) completed on 1/27/26 and documented…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, and interviews, it was determined that facility staff failed to ensure a resident's responsible party (RP) received a written summary of the resident's baseline care plan. This deficient practice was evident for one resident (Resident #123 ) reviewed for baseline care plans during the annual survey.The findings include:A review of Resident #123's medical records on 04/21/2026 at 8:02 AM, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy and cognitive communication deficient. The resident's family member was identified as the RP. Further review of the medical records failed to show evidence that the facility provided the RP with a written summary of the resident's baseline care plan.On 04/21/2026 at 10:04 AM, during an interview, the Social Worker (SW) #14, stated for residents who lack cognitive capacity, baseline care plans are conducted with the resident's RP and that these meetings are documented in residents'…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to meet the needs of a Resident. This was evident for 1 (Resident #6) out of 1 resident reviewed for hospice care during the survey.The findings include:On 4/21/26 at 9:48 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #6's medical record. The review revealed that Resident #6 had an order for hospice services dated 10/28/25.On further review the surveyor noted Resident #6 had a facility care plan that stated, Resident #6 received hospice services with an interventions to have hospice services provide visits to assist with care needs and additionally for the facility to work cooperatively with the hospice team to ensure Resident #6 's spiritual, emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs were met. On 4/21/26 at 12:50 PM, the surveyor requested all hospice service documentation. Next the surveyor reviewed a joint care plan from the hospice provider and the facility dated 10/24/25. The care plan outlined that both hospice providers and the facility would be responsible for symptom…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-27 · 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 clinical record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to hold care plan meetings with the interdisciplinary team for a resident at the time of the quarterly and annual revision of their care plans, and also failed to invite the resident/responsible party to these meetings. This was evident for 1 (Resident #114) of 8 residents reviewed for care planning during the survey.The findings include:On 04/21/26 at 7:30 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #114's clinical record. The review revealed that Resident #114's quarterly MDS assessment was completed on 1/19/26 and an annual assessment was completed on 10/19/25. The clinical record contained no evidence that the interdisciplinary team held a care plan meeting with the resident/responsible party within 7 days or around the time of either the last quarterly or annual MDS assessment. Furthermore, there was no evidence to indicate that the facility staff invited the resident/responsible party to the meetings.On 04/23/2026 at 8:17 AM, Social Worker Designee #14 (SWD) reviewed Resident #114's clinical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident who required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) received scheduled showers. This deficient practice was evident for one resident (#133) reviewed for ADL care during the annual survey.The findings include: During an interview on 04/20/2026 at 12:44 PM, Resident #133 stated they are scheduled to receive showers on Tuesday s and Friday and reported they did not receive a scheduled shower on Friday 04/17/2026.On 04/21/2026, a review of the resident's electronic medical record revealed documentation indicating the resident did not receive a shower on 04/17/2026.During an interview at 12:58 PM, the Unit Manager (UM) #8 stated staff are required to document showers in the electronic medical record and in the shower book. Review of the shower book showed a shower on 04/14/2026, but no entry for 04/17/2026. The surveyor informed the UM #8 of the lack of documentation. The UM #8 stated the resident is capable of reporting shower receipt and acknowledged the resident likely did not…
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 · D2026-04-27 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide appropriate care measures to prevent complications from a hand contracture. This was evident for 1 (Resident #7) of 2 residents reviewed for mobility. The findings include:A contracture is an abnormal shortening of muscle, tendons, skin, or tissues, causing resistance to stretching. Failure to protect the palm of the hand when the hand is contracted can result in injury to the palm of the hand caused by the pressure of fingers/fingernails pressing into the palm of the hand.On 4/20/26 at 10:07 AM, the surveyor conducted an interview with Resident #7. During the interview, Resident #7 stated that he/she had a splint for his/her left hand but only used it occasionally. Resident #7 further stated that he/she sometimes needed help putting the split on. The surveyor noted that the splint was not on the Resident.On 4/22/26 at 8:16 AM, the surveyor observed that the splint was not on Resident #7 and asked if anyone had offered to put the splint on. Resident #7 answered…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice when administering intermittent intravenous (IV) antibiotic infusions. This was found to be evident in 1 (#200) out of 1 resident observed for intravenous access care. The findings include:On 4/20/2026 at 9:15 AM, Resident #200 told the surveyor that his IV antibiotics were discontinued on Friday but his IV line was still in his left upper arm. Resident #200 showed the surveyor the IV line. The surveyor observed bloody fluid in the IV tube and on the bandage that was dated 4/10/2026.On 04/20/2026 at 9:22 AM, Registered Nurse #3 told the surveyor the IV should have been removed when the antibiotics were finished. When asked how often the dressing should be changed, she responded it should be changed every 7 days, verified that the current dressing had been on for 10 days, and stated she would remove the IV now.The Director of Nursing acknowledged the concern on 04/21/2026 at 11:58 AM.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with acceptable professional standards for accuracy. This was found evident in 4 (Resident #138, #6, #4, & #8) of 51 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include:1) On 4/20/26 at 9:41 AM, the surveyor conducted an interview with Resident #138. During the interview Resident #138 stated that he/she was admitted to the hospital due to a Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). On 4/22/26 at 9:43 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #138's medical record. The review revealed that Resident #138 was hospitalized in August of 2025. The discharge summary from that hospital stay recommended that Resident #138 be followed up by Urology. On further review of the medical record, it was noted that there was no urology consultation notes present. On 4/22/26 at 9:45 AM, the surveyor requested the urology consultation notes for Resident #138. On 4/22/26 at 1:41 PM, the surveyor conducted an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON). During the interview the DON stated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to handle soiled linen safely. This was found to be evident in 1 (Rosemary) out of 5 units observed during the annual survey. The findings include:On 04/22/2026 at 7:54 AM, the surveyor observed a linen cart in the soiled utility room with the lid off and unbagged linen overflowed onto the floor. Licensed Practical Nurse #17 stated the clothes should be bagged and thought the linen is supposed to be picked up once a week but would call for a pick up. On 04/27/2026 at 8:04 AM, the Director of Nursing acknowledged the concern regarding unbagged, soiled linen in the soiled utility room.
- Potential for harm · F2026-02-05 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — widespreadEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
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 interviews, the facility failed to provide 3 (R24, R25, and R26) of the 3 sampled residents' meals at the designated normal mealtimes and in accordance with their needs, preferences, and requests. The facility census was 174.Record review of the facility's dietary policy, last revised 10/2022 and titled Frequency of Meals, documented that at least three daily meals will be provided, at regular times comparable to normal mealtimes in the community. The policy described the procedures as follows:Dietary Procedures:The Dining Service Director coordinates with the residents, Administrator, and/or Director of Nursing Services to establish the meal and snack times that are comparable with normal times in the community. A schedule of meal service times will be provided to the nursing staff and available in resident/patient care areas. The Dining Services Director will ensure that each meal is served within the designated time frame unless there is an emergency or a resident's request.During…
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 · Fcited before2026-02-05 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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, records reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a functional, sanitary and comfortable environment for 5(R#3, R#20, R#21, R#22 and R#23) of 5 sampled residents when a toilet had rust and black mold around the seal of toilet along with leakage with water. The facility census was 174.Findings include:Record review of facility policy Resident/Patient Room Cleaning dated 2/2025, revealed Healthcare Services Group, Inc (HCSG) is committed to providing a safe, clean, and hygienic environment for residents, staff, and visitors in accordance with regulatory guidance and industry best practices. Restrooms will be regularly cleaned and disinfected with a particular focus on disinfecting high-touch surfaces such as light switches, the wall near the toilet, trash cans, grab bars, the sink, and the toilet (including the seat and handle).Record review of facility policy Safe and Homelike Environment dated 1/2026, revealed in accordance with resident rights, the facility will provide…
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 · D2025-03-06 · 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 observations, staff and resident interviews, and record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to treat a resident with dignity by not: 1) ensuring that Resident #429's foley drainage bag was covered; and 2) promoting an environment that enhances the quality of life. This was evident for 2 (Resident #429 and Resident #97) of 17 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include: A foley drainage bag, or urinary drainage bag, is a medical device used to collect urine from a catheterized resident. The drainage bag is usually worn on the leg or attached to a bed. 1) During observation rounds on 2/27/25 at 10:12 am, Resident #429 was noted to have a foley catheter bag attached to his/her bed. The foley drainage bag was uncovered and contained yellow liquid. The bag was attached to the side of the bed facing the door. Resident #429's door was open, and the foley drainage bag was visible from the hallway. On 2/27/24 at 1:58 pm, the surveyor interviewed the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). He stated that the expectation was that all foley catheters have 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 · D2025-03-06 · 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
Based on resident record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide residents and/or the resident's representative with an opportunity to formulate an advanced directive. This was evident for 3 (Residents #169, #85, and #173) out of 9 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include: On 02/28/25 at 09:46 AM, Resident #169's medical record was reviewed. The medical record review revealed that Resident #169 did not have an advanced directive in place. On 02/28/25 at 10:18 AM, Resident #85's medical record was reviewed. The medical record review revealed that Resident #85 did not have an advanced directive in place. On 02/28/25 at 10:33 AM, Resident #173's medical record was reviewed. The medical record review revealed that Resident #173 did not have an advanced directive in place. On 02/28/25 at 10:38 AM, the Director of Social Services #3 was interviewed. During the interview, the Director of Social Services #3 stated that Residents #169, #85, and #173 do not have an advanced directive in place. Also, the Director of Social Services…
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 before2025-03-06 · 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
Based on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean, safe, homelike environment. This was evident for 8 (Residents #51, #85, #94, #154, #90, #478, #109, and #117) out of 183 residents observed during the survey. The findings include: 1. On 2/27/25 at 8:34 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #90's room. Marring and scraping were noted on the wall behind the resident's bed. There was a large spackled area of approximately 50% of the wall that required painting. 2. On 2/27/25 at 8:37 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #117's room. There was scraping noted on the wall behind the resident's bed. 3. On 2/27/25 at 12:07 PM, the surveyor observed that Resident #478's room was dirty. The floor was dirty with food and trash around the bedside. The resident was unable to reach the trash can because it was too far away. 4. On 2/27/25 at 12:45 PM, during an interview with Resident #109, the resident reported that the faucet in the bathroom was loose and not secure. The resident further stated that the baseboard was separated from the wall. At…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-06 · 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 resident family interviews and facility record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent residents from being physically abused. This was evident for 1 (Residents #85) out of 20 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include: On 02/27/25 at 08:04 AM, the surveyor attempted to interview Resident #85. During the interview, the resident was non-verbal when asked questions regarding his/her stay at the facility and questions about the Facility Reported Intake MD00208175. On 02/27/25 at 10:27 AM, the resident ' s medical record was reviewed. The resident medical record review revealed that Resident #85 had a medical diagnosis of Alzheimer ' s Disease and schizophrenia. On 02/28/25 at 10:53 AM, Resident #85's daughter was interviewed. During the interview, Resident #85's daughter stated that Resident #85 was physically assaulted by a facility staff member in July 2024. On 03/03/25 at 09:36 AM, the facility's records were reviewed. The facility record review revealed that the facility's initial Facility Reported Incident and the follow-up Facility…
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 · D2025-03-06 · 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 observation and record review, it was determined that the facility nursing staff failed to follow professional standards of practice when administering medications to (resident #110 and #30). This was evident during observation of medication administration. The findings include: 1) On 3/4/25 at 8:30 AM, the surveyor observed that Resident #110 refused Lidocaine Patch as ordered by the physician during medication administration. Following the medication administration observation, a review of Resident #110's March 2025 medication administration record (MAR) showed that the lidocaine patch for Resident #110 was documented as given and not refused. 2) On 3/4/25 at 8:44 AM, the surveyor observed Nurse #21 preparing 11 tablets in a medicine cup to be administered to Resident #30. Nurse #21 stated that Zinc 220mg was unavailable and could not be given to Resident #30. Following the medication administration observation, a review of Resident #30's March 2025 medication administration record (MAR) showed that Nurse #21 had documented that the resident received the Zinc. The review…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interviews, medical and administrative record reviews, and observations it was determined that the facility failed to address a resident's request for removal of a feeding tube. This was evident for 1 (#142) out of 4 residents reviewed for nutrition during the survey. The findings include: Tube feeding is a way to provide nutrition when you cannot eat or drink safely by mouth. There are risks associated with residents using feeding tubes for nutrition. These risks include aspiration (accidentally inhaling your stomach contents), accidental dislodgement (tube moving out of place or coming out), bleeding and perforation (hole in the wall of your bowel or intestine), infection near the site, pain, and stomach leakage to name some. Appropriate treatment and services are required to prevent complications of enteral feeding. On 02.27.25 at 09:15 AM while making clinical unit rounds the surveyor observed that Resident #142 had a feeding tube in place. Resident #142 informed the surveyor that the feeding tube was not being used for nutrition currently. 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 before2025-03-06 · 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 observations, medical record review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. This was evident for 6 out of 29 opportunities observed for medication errors. The findings Include: 1) During medication observation on 3/4/25 at 8:05 AM for Resident #61, the surveyor observed LPN (Nurse Practical Nurse) Nurse#21 preparing the resident's insulin injection. Nurse #21 filled an empty insulin syringe with 30 units of insulin injection from a prefilled insulin pen. Nurse #21 went into Resident #61's room to give him/her the insulin injection. The surveyor questioned the nurse about how many units of insulin were to be given to the resident per the attending provider's order, and she reported 24 units of insulin. Due to the surveyor's intervention, nurse #21 discarded 6 units of insulin from the syringe and administered 24 units. 2) Continued observation for Nurse #21 on 3/4/25 at 8:30 AM, the surveyor observed that Resident #110 refused Lidocaine Patch as ordered by the physician during medication…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview with facility staff and medical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed for a significant medication error for an Insulin Dependent resident. This was evident during the review of 1 of 1 resident (Resident #61) reviewed during survey process. The Findings Include: During medication administration on 3/4/25 at 8:05 AM for Resident #61, the surveyor observed nurse #21 preparing the resident's insulin injection. Nurse#21 filled an empty insulin syringe with 30 units of insulin injection from a prefilled insulin pen. Nurse #21 went into Resident #61's room to give him/her the insulin injection. The surveyor questioned the nurse about how many units of insulin were to be given to the resident per the attending provider's order, and she reported 24 units of insulin. Due to the surveyor's intervention, nurse #21 discarded 6 units of insulin from the syringe and administered 24 units. Review of Resident #61's medication administration record (MAR) March 2025 on 3/4/25 at 10:30AM, revealed an order for a Basaglar Tempo insulin Pen…
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 · D2025-03-06 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store medications, as evidenced by failing to discard expired medications. This was evident for 1 of 3 medication storage rooms observed during the survey. The findings include: An observation of the Potomac Unit medication storage room on 2/27/25 at 8:00 AM with LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) #21 present revealed 2 bags of Intravenous drugs with expiration dates of 9/1/24, a COVID self-test kit with an expiration date of 12/20/2023, and an Insulin injection pen with an expiration date of 8/1/24. During an interview on 2/27/25 at 8:45 AM, the assistant director of nursing (ADON) said that she expected the staff to dispose of expired medications. The expired medications were removed at that time by ADON.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · 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 observations and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food and drink that accommodates the resident intolerances. This was found to be evident for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #100) selected for review. The findings include: On 02/27/25 at 08:29 am during the initial observation of the unit, an interview with Resident #100 revealed that s/he is lactose intolerant and is supposed to get lactose free milk with meals. Review of the menu sheet for this resident showed Lactaid milk - 8oz, however S/he was given 2% milk which was not what was marked on his/her menu sheet. Resident #100 stated that often times the milk is incorrect. On 02/27/25 at 08:32 am GNA (Geriatric Nursing Aide) #20 was made aware of the resident receiving the incorrect milk. On 02/28/25 at 09:11 am a follow-up interview was conducted with Resident #100 and they stated the staff brought no milk this date and the milk choice on the menu sheet was crossed out. This was verified on the menu sheet by the surveyor observation. On 03/05/25 at 01:39 PM an interview 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 before2025-03-06 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a sanitary, comfortable environment for residents, staff and public. This was evident for 1 unit out of 5 units observed during the survey. The findings include: On 2/27/25 at 7:48 AM, during observation rounds, there was a strong, ammonia urine-like odor throughout the hallways and residents' rooms on the [NAME] Unit. On 2/27/25 at 7:52 AM, Unit Manager #22 was interviewed. During the interview, Unit Manager #22 stated and agreed to the strong ammonia, urine-like odor throughout the hallways and residents' rooms on the [NAME] Unit. On 02/27/25 at 12:52 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator #1 and the Director of Nursing #2 were interviewed. During the interview, the Nursing Home Administrator #1 and the Director of Nursing #2 were made aware of the strong ammonia, urine-like odor observed throughout the hallways and residents' rooms on the [NAME] Unit. On 3/05/25 at 1:00 PM, during observation rounds, there was still a strong ammonia, urine-like odor throughout the hallways and residents'…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-29 · 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 review of resident medical records, interview with residents and facility staff, and observation of facility security footage, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from physical abuse. This was evident for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. The findings include: On 8/29/23 at 10:00 AM, facility-reported incident MD00196095 was reviewed. The facility-reported incident indicated Resident #1 alleged that, on 8/13/23, Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) #3 pushed Resident #1 back into his/her wheelchair and placed hands on his/her face. The report noted that the resident had no skin impairments, pain, or discomfort following the incident. Resident #1's medical record was reviewed on 8/29/23 at 10:19 AM. The review revealed a physician's progress note dated 8/15/23 at 1:35 PM that stated the resident had an altercation, but that the resident was without pain or discomfort, denies any acute issues. No injuries from recent event. Change-in-condition follow-up assessments after the incident on 8/13/23 referred to the reason for…
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 · F2020-01-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 surveyor observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food using sanitary practices in accordance with professional standards for food services safety. This was evident in the main kitchen and the second floor dining room. The findings include: 1. On 01-27-2020 at 8:30 AM, surveyor tour with the Dietary Manager of the walk-in freezer revealed a box of pork chops, a box of french bread sticks and a container of sausages opened without labels to identify when the food products were without use by dates. On 01-27-2020 at 8:45 AM, an interview with the Certified Dietary Manager revealed the identified products should have a use by date on them but they did not.2. On 01-27-2020 at 12:33 PM, surveyor observation of the lunch service of the second floor dining room revealed Kitchen Aide #2 checking temperatures of the lunch items on the dining room steam table with a thermometer. Kitchen Aide #2 did not sanitize the thermometer probe prior to inserting the probe into the various lunch items. On 01-27-2020 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2020-01-31 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to invite residents and/or their representative for interdisciplinary care conferences, and failed to review and revise residents' care plan as necessary. The finding was evident for 5 of 38 residents selected for review during the survey (#45, #78, #153, #104, #14, #37, and #137). The findings include: MDS (Minimum Data Set) is part of the U.S. federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents in Medicare or Medicaid certified nursing homes. Quarterly review assessment is an assessment due no less frequently than every 92 days. 1. On 01-28-2020 the review of Resident #45's clinical record revealed that the resident had MDS quarterly review assessments with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 06-21-2019. There was no evidence the resident's clinical record to show that the facility staff invited Resident #45 and/or the resident's representative to an interdisciplinary care conferences. 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 · E2020-01-31 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — patternProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, surveyor observation, review of the clinical record and interview of facility staff, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide timely intervention for a resident with dental problems. This finding was evident in 1 of 3 residents reviewed for the dental care area (Resident #32). The findings include: On 01-28-2020 at 8:59 AM, during resident interview, Resident #32 complained of a broken tooth on the right side which bleeds and causes pain during meals. Resident #32 stated staff were informed of complaint of the broken tooth, and advised Resident #32 that the tooth needed to come out. Review of the clinical record revealed a dental consult was ordered on 01-07-2020. As of 01-30-2020 Resident #32's tooth had not been evaluated by the dentist. A review of care plan for Resident #32 revealed that the resident had dental issue identified in August 2019 as follows: Resident has oral/dental health problems, of no upper dentures related to poor nutrition and poor oral hygiene with a goal that the resident would be free of infection, pain or…
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 · D2020-01-31 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the review of administrative documents and interviews with residents and facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents who filed written grievances were informed of the findings and corrective actions taken. This finding was evident for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #56) reviewed for the personal property care area. The findings include: On 01-27-2020 at 2:59 PM, an interview with Resident #56 revealed the resident reported missing articles of clothing and blankets to the facility staff months ago, but did not receive a response from the facility about the status of the grievance. On 01-27-2020, a review of Resident #56's inventory of personal effects dated, 06-25-2018, revealed the resident brought multiple articles of clothing and blankets into the facility. On 01-27-2020 a review of a facility grievance report dated, 08-26-19, revealed Resident #56 complained that three articles of clothing and three blankets were missing. There was no documented evidence that the facility responded to Resident #56's grievance. On 01-30-2020 at 9:20 AM,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-31 · 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, a review of clinical records, and interviews with family members and facility staff, it was determined that the facility staff failed to follow a physician's order for 1 of 38 residents reviewed during the survey (Resident #14). The findings include: 1. On 1-28-2020 at 9:00 AM, the review of Resident #14's clinical record revealed the resident had a diagnosis of pneumonia and dysphagia (dysphagia is a condition in which a person's ability to eat and drink is disrupted). Further review revealed a physician's order, dated 1-8-2020, for the resident to have nectar thick liquids and no straws with beverages. Nectar is a substance used to thicken liquids. Thickened liquids are used for individuals with dysphagia to improve the ability to safely swallow liquids to prevent aspiration, pneumonia and death. On 1-30-2020 at 9:10 AM, observation of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 during medication pass revealed the nurse administered Resident #14 medications using water that was not thickened and with a straw. On 1-30-2020 at 10:00 AM, surveyor interview with unit…
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 · D2020-01-31 · 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 surveyor observation, review of the clinical record, and staff interview, it was determined that that the facility staff failed to utilize appropriate measures to prevent complication related to an indwelling catheter for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for the indwelling catheter care area (Resident #12). The finding includes: On 01-28-2020 at 3:07 PM, observation during rounds revealed Resident #12 presented with an indwelling catheter, however further observation revealed that the catheter was not anchored. Keeping the catheter anchored is necessary to prevent excessive tension on the catheter which can lead to urethral tears or dislodging of the catheter. Observation on 01-29-2020 at 9:50 AM and 4:35 PM also revealed Resident #12's catheter was not anchored. On 01-30-2020 at 2:30 PM, a review of Resident #12's the treatment administration record (TAR) revealed the charge nurse, Staff #6, had signed the TAR on 01-30-2019 which instructed facility staff to use catheter securing device to reduce excessive tension on the tubing and facilitate urine flow . On 01-30-2020 at 2:45 PM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-31 · 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 surveyor observations, review of clinical records, and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medication administration error were less than five (5) percent. This finding was evident for 3 of 25 (12%) medication administration opportunities observed during the survey. The findings include: 1. On 01-29-2020 at 9:00 AM, observation of Resident #266's 9:00 AM medication administration revealed Nurse #1 administered 960 milligrams (mg) of acetaminophen to Resident #226. Acetaminophen is a medication used to treat aches and pains and to reduce fever. On 01-29-2020 at 9:30 AM, surveyor review of Resident #266's clinical record revealed a physician's order to administer 1000 mg of acetaminophen at 9:00 AM. On 01-29-2020 at 9:38 AM, the interview with Nurse #1 revealed no additional information. On 01-31-20 at 10:00 AM, interview with the Director of Nursing revealed no additional information. 2. On 01-29-20 20at 9:00 AM, observations of Resident #266's 9:00 AM medication administration revealed Nurse #1 did not administer…
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 · D2020-01-31 · tag F0926 — failed to keep the home smoke-free / fire-safe — isolatedHave policies on smoking.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observations and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure residents safely disposed of smoking cigarettes. This finding was evident during 1 of 4 smoking observations. The findings include: 1. On 01-28-2020 a review of the facility smoking policy revealed ashtrays and sealed, fire-safe metal containers should be used for the disposal of ashes and other smoking products. In addition, facility staff should ensure that smoking materials are extinguished before they are discarded. On 01-28-2020 at 11:10 AM, observation during the designated smoking time revealed Resident #26 was seated in the corner of the smoking patio smoking a cigarette. Furthermore, after Resident #26 finished smoking the cigarette, the resident threw the unextinguished cigarette into a grassy area where dozens of cigarette butts were lying. On 01-28-2020 at 11:15 AM, observation during the designated smoking time revealed Resident #66 finished smoking a cigarette and threw their lit cigarette into a pot of plants. The assigned smoking monitor…
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 · Bcited before2020-01-31 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — patternImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the review of the clinical record, interviews with legal guardians and facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to notify a legal guardian of changes in a residents' condition. This finding was evident for 1 of 38 residents reviewed during the survey (Resident #139). The findings include: This finding was identified during the investigation of complaint MD00149759. 1. On 01-28-2020 at 10:00 AM, surveyor interview with Resident #139's legal guardian stated that on 12-13-2019 the facility notified her that the resident had an injury of unknown origin. Further interview revealed the resident's legal guardian was not notified that the facility investigated the incident and determined the injury was a result of Resident #139 falling. On 01-29-2020 at 9:30 AM, surveyor interview with the [NAME] unit manager revealed Resident #139's roommate reported witnessing Resident #139 fall to the facility's staff during their investigation of Resident #139's injury of unknown origin. On 1-31-2020 at 10:30 AM, surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing revealed no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2020-01-31 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on the review of a clinical record, interviews with legal guardians and facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to report an incident of injury of unknown origin to the Office of Health Care Quality (OHCQ). This finding was evident for 1 of 38 residents reviewed during the survey (Resident #139). The findings include: This finding was identified during the investigation of complaint MD00149759. 1. On 1-28-2020 at 10:00 AM, surveyor review of Resident #139 's clinical record revealed a nursing progress note written on 12-13-2019 that documented the resident had a bruise to the left shoulder. Further review of the note revealed an x-ray was ordered on 12-13-2019. The results of the x-ray revealed Resident #139 had a left clavicle fracture. There was no evidence of a fall or other incident involving the resident documented in the record prior to 12-13-2019. The facility failed to report the injury of unknown origin to OHCQ. On 1-31-2020 at 10:30 AM, an interview with the Director of Nursing did not reveal additional information.
“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 STERLING CARE — 6 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 | 3 of 5 | 4.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BBF HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2022 |
| JEK IRRV TR | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/01/2022 |
| NMJ IRRV TR | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/01/2022 |
| SAVA ACQUISITION LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/01/2022 |
| FRANKEL, CHAIM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/01/2022 |
| KAGAN, JEFFREY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 06/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
4 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 70% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 215187. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-27, 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.