Autumn Lake Healthcare At Waugh Chapel
1221 Waugh Chapel Road, Gambrills, MD 21054 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 110 certified beds · (410) 923-2020 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — 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)
- about 25% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 17.7% | 20.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.0% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 16.3% | 22.8% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 2.4% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.6% | 16.7% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.6% | 5.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.3% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.5% | 13.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.4% | 80.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.8% | 21.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.6% | 9.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.78 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.36 | 1.20 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
66.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 866 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 82.4% 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 352 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 0.67 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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 | 66.5%CMS range 63.3–69.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 13.2%CMS range 10.9–15.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than 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 | 82.4% | 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 | 71.3% | 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 | 68.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 98.3% | 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 | 97.5% | 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 | 0.6% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.2% | 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 | 5.9%CMS range 4.4–7.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.32 | 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 110 beds and averages 106.2 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.64 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.66 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.23 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.81 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.74 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% 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.
31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to consistently maintain a comfortable homelike environment for the residents. This deficient practice was evidenced in 18 of 29 days during the month of June.The findings are:On 06/29/26 at 10:53 am during observation rounds the surveyor observed a total of twelve portable air conditioning units on the nursing units throughout the building.On 06/29/26 at 10:59 am the surveyor spoke with Resident #5 and asked did they have any issues with the temperature of the building. Resident #5 verbalized it was hot a couple of weeks ago for a few days, but it was cool at that time. On 06/29/06 at 11:01 am the surveyor asked Resident #6 were there days when it was hot in the building. Resident #6 verbalized you bet your life we did, it was 89 degrees in here according to the thermostat. Part of the building was cold and part was hot. The current temp on the thermostat read 74 degrees F. Resident #6 verbalized they couldn't breathe even while…
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 before2026-06-30 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview it was determined that the facility staff failed to accurately code a resident's MDS assessment. This deficient practice was evidenced in 1 (#2) of 3 MDS assessments reviewed during the complaint survey.The Minimum Data Set (MDS) is a federally mandated standardized clinical assessment tool used in Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing homes to evaluate the health, functional capacity, and care needs of residents.The findings include:On 06/30/26 at 12:05 pm a review of Resident #2 medication administration record (MAR) for June 2026 revealed the resident was ordered and receiving Normal Saline 10 ml intravenous (IV) every shift from 06/02/26 until the order was discontinued on 06/15/26. The nursing staff signed off the saline flush was given until 06/13/26 during night shift. A note was written by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) dated 06/13/26 at 4:21 pm indicated Resident #2 had a left arm peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line was flushed without difficulty.On 06/30/26 at 12:12 pm a review of the resident's MDS that was completed…
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 · E2026-05-06 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 with residents and facility staff it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the resident call bell system was functioning properly. This was found to be evident in 4 Resident's (#68, #125, #106, #74) rooms in 3 of 3 units observed for call light function and response. Findings include: 1. An initial tour of the facility was conducted on 5/3/26 at approximately 10:50 AM on the 100 hallway. During an interview with Resident # 68 the resident stated that s/he wanted to express concerns regarding call response times of staff. The resident stated that it takes up to three hours to get assistance to go to the bathroom. The resident stated that there are times that the call light does not work. At this time the surveyor asked the resident to turn the call light on, and the call light did not light up on the wall unit, the dome located outside of the resident room did not light up and the call light did not light up at the nurse station. At this time the surveyor conducted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-06 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain resident dignity by leaving a resident's urinary catheter tubing uncovered and in public view. This was evident for 1 (resident # 35) out of 1 resident observed with a urinary catheter during the survey.The findings include:During observation rounds on 05/03/2026 at approximately 10:47 AM, Surveyor observed Resident #35 sitting in a geriatric chair in the facility dining room with a urinary catheter in place. The catheter tubing was uncovered and exposed in public view. Further observation revealed the resident was not fully clothed and lacked a blanket or sheet to cover the catheter tubing while in the common dining area.During an observation and interview conducted on 05/03/2026 at approximately 10:50 AM, Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) Staff #5 observed the resident and agreed with the findings, stating, I will take care of it.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-06 · 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 random observations and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences (dependent resident preference for linen changes and to be out of bed at least daily). This was evident for 1 (Resident #94) of 20 residents interviewed and investigated for reasonable accommodations needs / preferences. The findings include:On 05/05/2026 at 11:17 AM the surveyor was informed by GNA# 18 that Resident #94 wanted to speak with a surveyor. The surveyor entered Resident 94's room and observed that the resident's over the bed table had a small portable call bell in place. The resident stated that the GNAs on 3PM-11PM and 11PM to 7AM shift were slow to respond to call bells on the dates of 05/02 and 05/03, 2026. Additionally, the resident stated that the GNAs did not ensure the resident was out of bed on Saturday or Sunday, 05/02 and 05/03, 2026. Also, the resident stated that he/she requested to have his/her linen changed because he/she frequently feels wet, but the GNA staff would 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-06 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered and documented in accordance with physician orders, accepted standards of nursing practice, and the facility's established medication administration time parameters for 2 (#98, #18) of 5 residents observed during medication administration observations.Findings include:This deficient practice had the potential to affect the effectiveness of medications intended to manage hypertension, pain, constipation, anxiety, and provide prophylactic and supplemental treatment.During a medication administration observation conducted on 5/3/26 beginning at 10:15 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff #4, review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #98 revealed physician-ordered medications scheduled for administration at 9:00 AM had not been administered within the facility's established medication administration timeframe. Observation revealed the medications were administered at approximately 10:29 AM. The medications included:-Aspirin 81 mg by mouth 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 · D2026-05-06 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility failed to post the required nurse staffing data and post it in a prominent place readily accessible to visitors and residents. This was evident on 1 out of 2 nursing stations observed during the survey. The findings included:During observational rounds on 05/03/2026 at 10:50 AM of the facility Long-Term Care Unit, this surveyor was unable to locate the daily data requirements for the current nurse staffing information for units 4 and 5. During interview and observation on 05/03/2026 at 10:55 AM with manager on duty Staff #7, a Daily Assignment Sheet Nursing form was found in a hard plastic sign holder located on a counter behind the nursing station which was not in a prominent place or accessible for residents and visitors in wheelchairs. The manager on duty stated, This is the wrong sheet and not the nurse staffing information. I will get the correct one. The manager further agreed that the sign holder was not located in a prominent place, was not assessable for residents and visitors in wheelchairs, and would be…
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 · D2026-05-06 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered in accordance with physician orders and within the facility's established medication administration time parameters for 2 (#98, #18) of 5 residents observed during medication administration observations. The facility also failed to ensure prompt documentation of medication administration following administration.Findings include:During a medication administration observation conducted on 5/3/26 beginning at 10:15 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff #4, review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #98 revealed physician-ordered medications scheduled for administration at 9:00 AM had not been administered within the facility's established medication administration timeframe. Observation revealed the medications were administered at approximately 10:29 AM. The medications included:-Aspirin 81 mg by mouth for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis-Multivitamin one tablet by mouth for supplement-Vitamin B3 by mouth for supplementDuring an interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview it was determined the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices. This was evident in 3 (#12, #83, #95) of 5 resident medical records reviewed. The findings include: 1. Review of Resident #12's medical record on 05/04/2026 at 09:05 AM revealed a PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION & CONSULTATION visit note dated 04/10/2026 with no name, address or phone number of the company that provided the service. During an interview on 05/04/2026 at 10:09 AM the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA #1) stated the name of the contracted company that provides psych services to facility residents. The NHA was made aware that the contracted company name, address, and phone number was not on visit note dated 04/10/2026 for Resident #12 and verified that the company that provided the service was in fact the company contracted with the facility. 2. Review of Resident #83's medical record on 05/05/2026 at 08:40 AM revealed a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-06 · 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 the facility failed to use appropriate infection control practice for resident urinary catheter care. This was evident for 1 (#35) out of 1 residents observed with a urinary catheter during the survey.The findings include:During observation rounds on 05/03/2026 at approximately 10:47 AM, Resident #35 was found sitting in a geriatric chair in the facility dining room with a urinary catheter in place. The catheter drainage bag was observed resting directly on the floor. This practice increases the risk of contamination and is a potential source of infection for the resident. During an observation and interview on 05/03/2026 at approximately 10:50 AM with Geriatric Nursing Assistant Staff #5 stated, the bag should not be on the floor and should be attached to the chair. I will take care of it.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-06 · 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 interviews with residents and facility staff, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff and the public. This was found to be evident for 2 (#76, #15) of 100 residents reviewed during observational rounds, and 2 (dirty and clean) of 2 laundry areas observed. Findings include:1.During observation rounds conducted on 5/3/26 at approximately 11:00AM, an interview was conducted with Resident #76 and the resident stated that s/he had a difficult time sleeping. The resident went on to say that the air system in his/her room abruptly came on at approximately 1:45 PM on 5/2/26 and was very loud. The resident went on to say that the air system did not turn off until approximately 7:45 AM on 5/3/26, the next day. The resident stated that s/he got very little sleep due to the noise level.A meeting was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA #1) on 5/4/26 at approximately 9:35 AM and he was made aware of the resident's concern. The Administrator went on to explain that 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 before2025-11-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on complaint, reviews of a closed medical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the nursing staff failed to follow a physician's orders for withholding an antihypertensive medication when the resident's blood pressure reading was less than 110 mm/Hg. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed during the complaint survey.The findings include:Review of Complaint 2605041 on 11/19/25 at 12 noon revealed an allegation Resident #1 was not receiving quality of care at the facility.Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include but are not limited to post vascular surgery, arthritis, and hypertension. Resident #1 requires assistance from the nursing staff for some aspects of his/her care.Review of Resident #1's closed medical record on 11/19/25 at 12 noon revealed a physician order, dated 08/09/25, instructing the nursing staff to administer the blood pressure lowering medication, Amlodipine Besylate oral tablet, 2.5 mg, by mouth, one time a day, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the safety of the food items to prevent foodborne illness. This was evident for two nourishment room refrigerators out of two nourishment room refrigerators audited during the recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: During the surveyor's tour of the facility on 03/13/25 at 12:10 PM, the surveyor observed a large zip-lock bag with cooked food items dated 03/08/25 and an uncooked cauliflower, brown to black in color in a plastic bag dated 03/08 in the refrigerator, located in the nourishment room, close to the 400-unit Nurses' station. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) staff # 29 validated the findings and removed the resident's food from the refrigerator. The surveyor's further observation on 03/13/25 at 12:20 PM noted apple sauce dated 03/08/25 in the refrigerator, located near the 200-unit Nurses station. Unit secretary staff #37 witnessed and validated the findings and removed the apple sauce from the refrigerator. On 03/13/25 at 12:10 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 before2025-03-17 · 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, interviews and record reviews it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a resident's dignity by not covering the urinary drainage bag when the resident was being transported to and from rehabilitation activities. This was evident for 1 (Resident #73) of 2 residents reviewed for urinary catheter during a recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: On 3/10/25 at 7:55 AM during the initial tour of the facility, Resident #73 was observed with a Foley catheter, a device that drains urine from the bladder. The catheter was observed attached to a urinary drainage bag 1/3 filled with urine hanging under the bed. The Resident was asleep in bed at the time. 03/10/25 at 11:19 AM the surveyor returned to check on the resident and observed Staff #31, a Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA) as she wheeled the resident back to their room in a wheelchair. The urinary bag was not covered in a dignity bag, it was hanging on the wheelchair. In an interview with staff #31 she stated that part of her job description was to transport residents to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-17 · 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 a review of facility investigative material and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident remained free of physical abuse. This was evident for 1 (Resident #92) out of 2 residents reviewed for abuse during the Medicare/Medicaid recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) is a standardized and comprehensive assessment screening tool used to identify resident's individual needs and areas of concern. BIMS stands for Brief Interview for Mental Status. It is a screening tool used to assist with identifying a resident's current cognition and to help determine if any interventions need to occur. On 03/11/2025 at 12:09 PM, review of resident's record revealed that on 03/06/2023, Resident #92's BIMS assessments score was 13.0 out of 15.0 which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact around the time of the incident. On 03/11/2025 at 12:29 PM, during review of facility reported incident MD00190653 dated 03/29/2023, Resident #92 told Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #32 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, it was determined the facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse within 2 hours of the allegation to the regulatory agency, the Office of Health Care Quality (OHCQ). This was evident for 1 (Resident #29) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse during a recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: On 3/11/2025 at 8:38 AM, a review of the investigation report of Facility Reported Incident (FRI) #MD00202441, revealed that on 2/10/2024 Resident #29's daughter notified facility staff that the resident reported that on the previous evening care, the GNA (Geriatric Nursing Assistant) hit her/him on the buttock after s/he by self-admission punched the GNA. A review of the timeline of events revealed that the Director of Nursing (DON) was made aware of the allegation of abuse on 2/10/2024 at 3:00 PM and the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) on 2/10/2024 at 4:50 PM. However, further review of the investigation report of the FRI revealed documentation that the initial self-report of the allegation of abuse was submitted to the State Survey…
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 before2025-03-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to initiate and develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Residents who had frequent urinary tract infections (UTI). This was evident for one Resident (Resident #35), out of one Resident reviewed for urinary tract infections during the recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: On 03/11/25 at 10:15 AM medical record review revealed that Resident #35 had UTIs and used antibiotic therapy on 01/19/24: Keflex, on 05/22/24: Cipro, on 06/05/24: Cipro and on 12/30/24: Bactrim. The care plan was not initiated for risks and prevention of UTI. On 03/11/25 at 9:57 AM, an Interview with Social Services staff # 4 revealed that the Care plans are conducted regularly. The social worker documents the overview of the care plan meeting notes, and individual departments initiate and revise their care plans. On 03/12/25 at 03:59 PM, Reviewed with Infection Preventionist Staff # 1 and validated that Resident #35 ' s care plan did not include the risks and prevention for getting…
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 before2025-03-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff Interviews and medical record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to review and revise the Resident's comprehensive care plan by an interdisciplinary team (IDT). This was evident for 2 Residents (Residents #13 and #35) out of forty-four Residents reviewed for care plan revisions during the recertification/ Complaint survey. A care plan is used to assess, plan, and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care, and it flows from each Resident's unique list of diagnoses. It should be organized according to the Resident's specific needs. The care plan is a means of communicating and organizing the actions and assuring the Resident's needs are attended to. The care plan is to be reviewed and revised at each assessment time of the Resident to ensure the interventions on the care plans are accurate and appropriate for the Resident. The findings include: 1) Resident # 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and received long-term care, with a diagnosis of hemiplegia and hemiparesis…
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 before2025-03-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the interview of the facility staff and review of the medical records, it was determined that the facility failed to provide needed care and services that are resident-centered, in accordance with the resident's goals for care and professional standards of practice that will meet each resident's physical needs. This was evident for one Resident (Resident #13) out of 44 residents reviewed for quality of care during the recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: Resident # 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and received long-term care, with a diagnosis of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the left side. On 03/10/25 at 10:55 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #13 with left arm contracture without any pillow or device in place to treat the contracture. On 03/14/25 at 11 AM medical record review revealed that Resident #13 had an order for a soft bolster for LEFT arm positioning r/t contracture. Gently place bolster between elbow and ribs for abduction and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interviews and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, recognition and management of Pain. This was evident for one resident (Resident # 35) out of two residents reviewed for pain management, during the recertification/Complaint survey. The findings include: On 03/12/25 at 09:42 AM, a medical record review of the Medication administration record (MAR) for January and February 2025 for Resident #35 revealed that Pain medication was administered without attempting to offer any nonpharmacological interventions. Further review of physician's orders revealed: - Acetaminophen Tablet 325 MG, Give 2 tablets by mouth every 8 hours as needed for Mild Pain 1-4, Order Dated 06/20/2024. - Non-pharmacological interventions were attempted prior to administering any PRN pain med. as needed. Document the number corresponding to the NonPharmacological Interventions attempted: 1. Warm…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2020-02-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the medical record and other pertinent documentation and interviews of facility staff, it was determined the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation when allegations of abuse and or misappropriation of property were reported by residents. This was found to be evident for 2 of 2 facility reported incidents effecting the following residents (Resident #57 and Resident #64) The findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #57 on 1/31/2020 revealed diagnosis including weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, generalized anxiety disorder and adjustment disorder. On 6/4/19, Resident #57 reported that s/he was missing $50.00. According to the facility investigation and facility report MD00141259, the business office confirmed that $50.00 was withdrawn from the residents account on 5/7/19 by the resident. The investigation also documented that the Business office also discussed with the resident any possible recent purchases and the resident agreed that there was still $34.50 unaccounted for. According to the facility investigation that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2020-02-03 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and interview with facility staff it was determined that the facility failed to timely assess a resident's nutritional status. This was evident during the initial review of 3 of 7 of residents (Resident #65, Resident #99, Resident #107). The findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #65 on 1/28/2020 at 2:22 PM revealed diagnosis including admission secondary to fracture and admission for rehabilitation. Further review of the resident's medial record revealed a documented weight on 12/16/2019 at 120 pounds (lbs.) and the current weight from 1/24/2020 as 110 lbs., a noted 8.33% weight loss. The resident's medical record revealed that a nutritional assessment was completed by the Registered dietitian (RD), #10 on 1/3/2020, 22 days after the resident's admission. The assessment noted that the resident had a fair appetite, a weight loss of 4%, an intake of 75-100%, a stage 1 pressure ulcer to the resident's sacrum and bilateral heels. A review of the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2020-02-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews with the facility staff it was determined the facility staff failed to store foods properly in the dry storage area. This was found to be evident during an initial tour of the facility conducted during the facility's annual survey. Findings include: An initial tour of the main kitchen was conducted on 1/27/20 at 8:25 AM with the Food Service Director (FSD) present. There were multiple food items stored on the shelf (not in the original box) that were not date labeled, and as follows: 32 oz lemon juice with 5 bottles not date labeled 1 box of coffee packets, not date labeled 17 boxes (24 packs in each box) of fudge rounds not date labeled 8 (1 pound) boxes of [NAME] Orzo not date labeled 1 (18 oz) container of Pepper not date labeled 1 (18 oz) container of [NAME] not date labeled 1 (18 oz) container of Cayenne Pepper, not date labeled During an interview with the FSD after the initial tour was completed, she was asked about the process by which foods are date labeled. She…
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 before2020-02-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and medical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure all staff followed contact precaution guidelines set by the facility by 1) wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) as directed and 2) properly cleaning equipment that goes from room to room of a resident diagnosed with a communicable disease. This was evident during tours of the facility throughout the annual survey, observations and interviews with the staff. The findings include: Personal protective equipment (PPE) acts as a barrier between infectious materials and skin, nose, mouth or eyes. This barrier has the potential to block the transmission of contaminants from blood, bodily fluids or respiratory secretions and to prevent the spreading of germs. They are used for infection control purposes, designated according to the resident's individual diagnosis and the route that the contaminant could be spread. 1. During the tour of the facility on 1/28/2020 at 11:36 AM, surveyor observed Staff #13 exiting a resident room, Resident #38, was identified as being on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-03 · 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 surveyor observation, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain and enhance the dignity of the Resident # 19. This occurred in 1 of 7 sampled residents. The findings include: While interviewing the resident in the fifth-floor dining room during the resident council meeting on 1/29/20 at 11:00 am, and later in the day at 2:00 pm, the resident was noted with dried food particles on his/her wheelchair leg rests. On 2/3/20 at 11 am during a follow-up visit, the resident was again observed with the same dried food particle on his/her wheelchair footrests. During an interview with the resident at that time s/, he stated, my wheelchair is never washed. During an interview with the Director of Nursing on 2/3/20 at 1 pm, she states, the resident refuses to have his/her wheelchair washed. A review of the medical record did not reveal in the progress notes, or Care Plans that the resident refused to have his/her wheelchair washed. During an interview with the Administrator on 2/3/19, 1:30 pm she stated, the wheelchairs are scheduled to be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-03 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview it was determined that the facility staff failed to accurately code a resident's discharge from the facility. This was evident for 1 out of 1 residents (Resident #111) reviewed for discharges. The findings include: Review of the medical record on 1/31/2020 for Resident #111 for hospitalizations, revealed a discharge from the facility on 1/3/2020. Review of the Residents Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments revealed a discharge MDS assessment completed 1/3/2020 documenting that the resident was discharged to the hospital. However, a review of the resident's paper chart and electronic nursing notes documented that the resident was discharged home. Interview with the MDS Coordinator #15, on 1/31/2020 at 12:44 PM revealed that the resident did go home and was not discharged to the hospital as was coded in section 'A' of the MDS and a correction would be completed.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interviews with the facility staff it was determined the facility failed to follow the care plan for a resident noted to be resistant to care. This was found to be evident when abuse allegations were reviewed for (Resident #64) during the facility's annual survey. Findings include: The investigation for facility reported incident MD00149497 was reviewed on 1/28/20. It revealed the family of Resident #64 reported that Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) #26 was rude while providing care and told the resident, don't be resisting, you're hurting my back. Resident # 64 care plan was reviewed on 1/28/20 and it noted that the resident was resistive to care. Under interventions it indicated: if the resident becomes combative or resistive, postpone care/activity and allow time for him/her to regain composure. The Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed on 1/28/20 at 2:55 PM and she was made aware of the concern of GNA #26 not following the care plan when the resident became resistive. The DON stated that the GNA's have been educated to stop 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 before2020-02-03 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview with a resident and facility staff, it was determined the facility failed to update a care plan for a resident with a recent fall. This was evident for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #31) reviewed for falls during the survey. The findings include: Resident #31 was admitted with diagnoses that included Peripheral Vascular Disease, lack of coordination and Diabetes. A review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) on 1/28/20 at 10 AM revealed that on 1/10/20, the resident was found on the floor near his/her bed. S/he was assessed by the facility nursing staff, and no injuries were noted. Further review of the medical record revealed a physician ordered dated 6/27/18 for Non-Skid footwear for safety. Non-skid footwear has pliable soles with an intricate tread that helps to prevent slipping. Continued review of the medical record revealed a care plan dated 6/8/18 was in place for falls, however, Non-Skid footwear was not added as an intervention for safety. During an interview with Resident #31 on 1/28/20 s/he, stated: I was sitting on the edge…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-02-03 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on the review of employee files and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete Geriatric Nurse Assistant (GNA) performance reviews annually. This was evident for 3 of 3 employee files reviewed (GNA #22, #23 and #24). The findings include: Review of the GNA employee files for GNA #22, #23 and #24 on 2/3/2020 at 11:15 AM, failed to reveal that an annual evaluation was completed for the identified staff. The Director of Nursing was interviewed on 2/3/2020 at 11:52 AM and she stated that she was aware annual assessments needed completed but did state that the annual competencies were in place. The concern that for the identified employees whose hire date varied from 2017-2018 who were chosen for review and who had been employed consistently at this facility for over 12 months had not had an individual performance review to verify their abilities was reviewed at that time.
- Potential for harm · D2020-02-03 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, interview with facility staff it was determined that the facility failed to: 1) monitor and assess the continued need for potassium for a resident (Resident #82) and 2) monitor a resident's blood pressure as ordered by the physician and administer an ordered medication (Resident #24). This was evident in the review of 2 of 5 residents (Resident #82 and Resident #24) reviewed during the investigative stage of the survey. The findings include: 1. Review of Resident #82's electronic medical record on 1/22/20 at 10 AM revealed the resident was admitted 12/2019 with the diagnoses that included hypokalemia, cognitive impairment, chronic kidney failure and atrial fibrillation. Review of the Medication Administration Record for December 2019 revealed the resident was admitted on Lasix 40 milligrams by mouth for edema. Lasix is a diuretic used to treat edema and swelling caused by congestive heart failure, kidney disease, and other medical conditions. According to the Medication Administration Record, the diuretic (Lasix) was discontinued on 12/31/19. A 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 · Dcited before2020-02-03 · 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 medical record review and interview it was determined the facility staff failed to: 1) maintain the medical record in the most complete and accurate form for residents and 2) ensure Behavioral Health consultant progress notes were kept on the chart for other health care providers to review in a timely manner. This was evident for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #82 and Resident #38) reviewed during the annual survey. The findings include: Medical record documentation is a primary method ensuring communication of important clinical information between all shifts and amongst the interdisciplinary team members. Failing to ensure complete documentation in the resident's medical record increases the risk for adverse events related to communication failures between and amongst team members. A medical record is the official documentation for a healthcare organization. As such, it must be maintained in a manner that follows applicable regulations, accreditation standards, professional practice standards, and legal standards. All entries to the record should be legible and accurate. 1.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE — 59 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 5 of 5 | 2.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 58 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 58; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1221 WAUGH CHAPEL HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2021 |
| MD12 EQUITIES LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| HATZLACHA RABBAH LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| STERN, ARYEH | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| HEFTER, TZVI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/10/2023 |
| RYAN, JACQUELINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/10/2025 |
| SCHWARTZ, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| EIDLISZ, SOLOMON | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/27/2025 |
| GLUCK, RIVKA | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/27/2025 |
| ACCURATE STAFFING LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| BRAND SONNENSCHINE LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $5.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 25% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MD
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Maryland Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 215148. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-06, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.