Advanced Rehab At Autumn Lake Healthcare
515 Brightfield Road, Lutherville, MD 21093 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 110 certified beds · (410) 296-1990 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- 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
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,021 in federal fines (most recent 2024-01-11)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (62%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 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 | 3 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 | 16.9% | 20.4% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.5% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 18.3% | 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 whose ability to walk worsened | 36.4% | 22.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.8% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.5% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 5.9% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.7% | 25.0% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.1% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.0% | 1.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.1% | 80.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.4% | 21.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.9% | 9.8% | 12.0% | typical |
* 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.
65.8% 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 640 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 85.2% 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 203 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 0.78 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 94% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 65.8%CMS range 61.4–70.7 | 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 | 12.9%CMS range 10.9–14.8 | 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 | 85.2% | 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 | 65.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 50.2% | 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 | 94.7% | 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 | 99.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 95.5% | 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 | 3.1% | 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 | 8.3%CMS range 6.2–10.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.07 | 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 81.8 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 28 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.66 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.82 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
33 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-01-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a review of the facility investigation, resident medical records, and other pertinent documentation, interviews, and observations it was determined that the facility failed to provide immediate action, ongoing supervision, and/or a plan of care interventions to address a resident who was known to have exit seeking/elopement behaviors. This was evident for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for elopement during the complaint survey. This failure resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy for Resident #1. The facility implemented effective and thorough corrective measures following this incident. The facility's plan and action were verified during this survey, therefore this deficiency will be cited as past noncompliance. The date of correction was 1/8/24. The findings include: Medical record review on 1/10/24 at 9am revealed that Resident #1's diagnoses included but were not limited to Severe Dementia, Anxiety, Depression, and Multiple Sclerosis. According to the hospital discharge Resident #1 was admitted in October 2022 for Physical and Occupational Therapy Rehabilitation. 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 before2025-12-11 · 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 observation and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's dignified existence was maintained during a meal. This was evident for 1 of several observations made during meal times on the second floor units. The findings include: On 12/05/2025 at 12:14 PM, an observation while walking around the second floor units revealed Resident #2 in their room eating their lunch meal. The resident's bed was completely lowered to the floor and the resident was reaching their right hand up above their head onto the bedside table to eat off of their plate. The resident's bedside table which had their meal tray on it was above the resident's eye level. On 12/05/2025 at 12:16 PM, an interview with the resident revealed that staff informed him/her that their bed had to be in the lowest position. Further interview revealed that he/she was unable to see what he/she was grabbing off of their plate nor how much food was left on the plate as it was above their eye level. The resident further indicated they had to feel the plate to determine how much food was left…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
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 facilitate care plan meetings for residents. This was evident for 2 (Resident #45 and Resident #80) out of 3 residents reviewed for care planning. Care plan meetings are scheduled discussions where the healthcare team reviews a resident's condition, needs, and progress, using information such as the Minimum Data Set (MDS). The team collaborates to set or update care goals and interventions, address concerts, and ensure care is coordinated and individualized, with input from the resident and/or family when possible. The findings include: 1) On 12/04/2025 at 11:42 AM, an interview with Resident #45's representative revealed that he/she hadn't been invited to a care plan meeting in 2 years. On 12/04/2025 at 1:14 PM, an interview with the Social Services Director (Staff #7) revealed that the expectation was that care plans were completed at least quarterly. Further interview with Staff #7 revealed that residents and family members were invited to the care plan meetings, and the records of who attended…
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 · D2025-12-11 · 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 record review, observations, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate a resident's needs based on their condition. This was evident for 1 (Resident #45) out of 1 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs. The findings include: On 12/04/2025 at 9:23 AM, record review revealed that Resident #45 was paralyzed on the left side (cannot move the left side of their body). On 12/04/2025 at 12:45 PM, an observation of Resident #45 revealed that the resident's call bell was hung on the left hand side bed rail. On 12/05/2025 at 12:11 PM, an observation of the resident revealed that the call bell was still on the resident's left side. At the same time, the resident requested the surveyor to adjust his/her bed. When the surveyor asked if he/she could reach the bed adjustment remote or call bell, he/she reached and further indicated they were unable to. On 12/05/2025 at 12:16 PM, an interview with Geriatric Nursing Assistant (Staff #9) revealed that the expectation was that the call bell should be within the resident's reach. On 12/05/2025 at 1:26 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 before2025-12-11 · 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 record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that proper information was provided to the resident and/or resident representative regarding advanced directives. This was evident for 3 (Resident #4, #8, and #10) out of 6 residents reviewed for advance directives during an annual survey. The findings include: Advance directives are legal documents that explain a person's wishes for medical care if they are unable to speak for themselves. They may include instructions about treatments a person does or does not want and the designation of a healthcare proxy to make decisions on their behalf. These documents help ensure that medical care aligns with the person's values and preferences. 1) On 12/04/2025 at 1:32 PM, review of Resident #4's medical record failed to reveal an advanced directive. On 12/05/2025 at 1:08 PM, an interview with the Social Services Director (Staff #7) revealed that the expectation was that advance directives were addressed upon admission and if a resident did not have one that the facility would provide them information…
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 · D2025-12-11 · 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
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 that residents and/or resident representative received complete and written notice of transfer and/or bed hold rights. This deficient practice was evident for 2 (Resident #55 and #84) out of 5 residents review for hospitalization/discharge during the annual survey. The findings include: 1) On 12/09/2025 at 8:11 AM, a review of Resident #55's medical record revealed that the resident was transferred from the nursing facility to the hospital on [DATE] and 10/26/2025. Further review showed a nurse progress note dated 10/13/2025 at 10:49 AM that documented the resident was transferred to the hospital due to altered mental status and the emergency contact was made aware. On 10/26/2025 at 4:32 PM, a nurse progress note documented the resident was pocketing food, appeared lethargic, and was difficult to arose. The resident was ordered to be transferred to the emergency department. The emergency contact was notified and made…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that facility staff failed to accurately code the resident's status on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. This failure was evident for 1 resident (Resident #77) out of 8 residents reviewed for MDS assessments during the facility's recertification/complaint survey. The findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) is a federally mandated, standardized assessment tool used in Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs) to comprehensively assess a resident's clinical and functional status. The MDS is used to develop individualized care plans, monitor quality of care, and determine Medicare reimbursement. On 12/05/2025 at 9:08 AM, review of physician orders dated 10/15/2025 showed an order for a hospice consultation, and physician orders dated 10/16/2025 showed the resident was admitted under [NAME] Hospice services, effective 10/15/2025. On 12/05/2025 at 9:26 AM, review of Resident #77's most recent Significant Change in Condition (SCSA) MDS, 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 · Dcited before2025-12-11 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure 1) a resident's comprehensive care plan included a resident's medical need regarding oxygen and medication, 2) to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan to address a resident's significant change in condition related to hospice admission and end-of-life care needs, and 3) to conduct quarterly care plan meetings. This was evident for 1 (Resident #5) out of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care, 1 (Resident #5) of 5 residents reviewed for medications,1 resident (Resident #77) out of 1 resident reviewed for hospice care, and 1 (Resident #90) out of 5 complaints reviewed during annual survey. The findings include: 1a) A care plan is a resident-centered document that outlines identified needs, goals and interventions to guide the care provided. It must directly reflect the residents minimum data set (MDS), as the MDS identifies the resident's conditions, risks, and functional status.…
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 before2025-12-11 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to maintain professional standards of practice related to oxygen orders. This was evident for 1 (Resident #5) out of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The findings include: On 12/04/2025 at 1:05 PM, an observation of Resident #5 revealed that the resident was on 4 liters (the amount of oxygen) of oxygen. On 12/05/2025 at 10:55 AM, record review failed to reveal an active order for oxygen. On 12/05/2025 at 1:21 PM, an interview with the Director of Nursing revealed that the expectation was that if a resident was on oxygen, there should be an order to reflect it. The surveyor reviewed the concern.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure residents received respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice by: 1) failing to ensure respiratory/oxygen equipment was properly labeled and dated, and 2) providing oxygen therapy without a valid physician order and at flow rates inconsistent with prescribed orders. This deficient practice was evident for 2 residents (Residents #1 and #96) out of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory/oxygen therapy during the facility's recertification/complaint survey.The findings include:The findings include: Oxygen (O2) therapy is a treatment that provides you with extra oxygen to breathe in. It is also called supplemental oxygen. It is only available through a prescription from the health care provider. Oxygen tubing is a medical-grade hose that connects an oxygen source (like a concentrator or tank) to an oxygen delivery device, such as a nasal cannula or mask. It is designed 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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — isolatedEnsure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
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 geriatric nursing assistant (GNA) maintained an active certification. This deficient practice was evident for 1 (GNA #2) out of 4 GNA employee files reviewed during the annual survey. The findings include: On [DATE] at 7:30 AM, the surveyor reviewed the employee file for GNA #2, which failed to show evidence of an active GNA license. Further review of the filed revealed that the employee annual performance review was conducted on [DATE]. On [DATE], a GNA license search was conducted using Maryland Board of Nursing license lookup which revealed a license expiration date of [DATE] with a status of not renewed. The surveyor informed the Director of Nursing of the expired license and requested evidence of an active license and documentation of shifts worked since [DATE]. On [DATE] at 10:04 AM, during an interview with Human Resources (HR) the surveyor inquired about the process for ensuring nursing employee files are up…
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 22 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of records, review of complaints and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to 1) ensure narcotic record books were consistently signed by both incoming and outgoing nurses, 2) ensure that drug records were maintained in a manner that accounted for all controlled drugs and allowed for reconciliation of dispensed and administered medication, and 3) ensure that medication was administered in accordance with physician ordered parameters. This was evident for 8 of 8 medication carts observed during the medication storage task, 2 (Complaint #2646715, #2613978 ) of 5 complaints reviewed, and 1 (Resident #71) of 2 residents reviewed for pharmacy services during the annual survey. The findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) is a federally mandated, standardized assessment tool used in Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs) to comprehensively assess a resident's clinical and functional status. The MDS is used to develop individualized care plans, monitor quality of care,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · 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 interview, it was revealed that the facility failed to ensure the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNFABN) form was completed entirely. This was evident for 1 (Resident #26) out of 3 residents reviewed for beneficiary notification. The findings include: In a nursing home, beneficiary notifications are required notices given to residents or their representatives to inform them of changes in Medicare or Medicaid coverage, services or financial responsibility. These notices explain when covered services are ending, when services may not be covered, any potential costs to the resident, and the resident's right to appeal. Providing timely beneficiary notifications helps protect resident rights and ensures regulatory compliance. On 12/11/2025 at 10:12 AM, record review of the SNFABN document revealed that Resident #26's SNFABN form was incomplete. The section which asked the resident which option they would like regarding the billing of Medicare was left blank. On 12/11/2025 at 10:12 AM, an interview with Staff #7 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, it was determined that facility staff failed to establish infection control interventions to prevent the transmission of infection to residents. This deficient practice was evident for 3 (Resident #55, #3, and #95) of 5 residents reviewed for the infection control task during the annual survey. The findings include: On 12/04/2025, observations were made of Resident #3 at 9:07 AM, Resident #95 at 11:10 AM, and Resident #55 at 11:43 AM in their assigned rooms. During the observations, the surveyor noted that enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) signage was not posted on the residents' doors, and personal protective equipment (PPE) was not available outside of the residents' rooms. A review of Resident #3 medical record revealed an admission to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnosis, including orthopedic aftercare. The medical record included an order for daily wound dressing changes, however, further review failed to show an order for EBP. 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 · E2024-06-28 · 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 administrative record review and interviews with facility staff, it was determined the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation and maintain documents regarding allegations of resident abuse. This was found to be evident for 4 (Resident #424, Resident #101, Resident #120, and Resident # 99) of 25 residents reviewed for abuse during the facility's survey. Findings include, 1. MD00190231 was reviewed on 6/17/24 at 12:30PM for allegations of abuse. The survey team requested a copy of the facility's investigation for the incident that occurred on 2/27/23 with Resident #424. On the same date at 1:30PM the Regional Nurse (Staff # 9) provided the survey team with a copy of the investigation and upon review, it included the following documents: a list of the resident's diagnosis, an initial 5-day report and a summary page. There were no interviews with residents or staff and no signed statements. The DON was interviewed on the same date at 1:45 PM and she was asked if the facility had any additional documentation of resident and staff interviews as part of their…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-28 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 interviews with the resident and facility staff and record reviews, it was determined the facility failed to follow professional standards of nursing practice when administering medications to residents. This was found to be evident for 5 (Resident #60, #15, #502, and #509, #102) of 76 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include: 1.) Resident # 60 was admitted with the following but not limited diagnosis: Chronic Pain An interview was conducted with Resident # 60 on 6/13/24 at 11:15 AM and the resident stated that s/he cannot get medications on time. The resident went on to say that s/he puts the call light on at 2:00 PM to receive PRN (as needed) oxycodone (a controlled medication used to treat moderate to severe pain) and the medication is not given until 4:00 PM, after the next shift comes on duty. The resident also stated that his/her scheduled medications are given late as well. The DON was made aware of the resident concerns on 6/13/24 at 1:45 PM and a request was made by the survey team for access via point click care electronic computer system 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 · Dcited before2024-06-28 · 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 and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to treat each resident with dignity by not ensuring that residents' foley drainage bags were covered. This was evident for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #504) of 5 residents reviewed for dignity. The findings include: A foley drainage bag, or urinary drainage bag, is a medical device used to collect urine from a catheterized patient. The drainage bag is usually worn on the leg or attached to a bed. During observation rounds on 6/12/24 at 7:50 am, Resident #1 was noted to have a foley catheter bag attached to their bed. The foley drainage bag was uncovered and had amber colored liquid. The bag was attached to the door side of the bed. Resident #1's door was open, and the foley drainage bag was visible from the hallway. On 6/12/24 at 7:54 am, the surveyor interviewed Unit Manager Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6. When asked if residents with foley bags should have covers on the bags, LPN #6 stated foley bags should be covered and that she would ensure that the foley bags were covered. On 6/24/24 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 before2024-06-28 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a current copy of a resident's advance directive was in the resident's medical record. This was evident for 1 (Resident #512) of 5 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The findings include: During Record review on 6/13/24 at 1:45 PM, there was no record of an advance directive in Resident #512's electronic chart or paper chart. Based on medical records, the resident was admitted on [DATE]. On 6/13/24 at 2:15 PM, in an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON #17), DON #17 stated that the resident did have a Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form created on 5/31/2024. DON #17 provided a copy of resident's MOLST form, which was signed by Doctor #31 on 5/31/2024. DON #17 stated the Doctor had completed the form and left the MOLST form on their desk instead of placing it in the paper chart or uploading it in the electronic chart. The MOLST form was not in Resident #512's chart 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 · D2024-06-28 · 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 interview it was determined that the facility staff failed to notify the state agency of an alleged case of abuse within the 2-hour allotted timeframe and failed to report allegations of abuse to the state health department and to law enforcement. This was found to be evident for 2 (Resident # 83 and Resident #101) of 15 residents reviewed for abuse during the facility's survey. The findings include: 1. On 06/18/24 at 9:20 am surveyor received a copy of the facility's investigation of the facility reported incident MD00183880. Review of the self-report form revealed the alleged incident occurred on 09/25/22 during 3 pm to 11 pm shift. The alleged incident was reported to the state agency on 09/26/22 at 1 pm which was outside of the 2-hour allotted timeframe for reporting alleged abuse case. On 06/20/24 at 10:34 am a review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, and Exhibition policy revealed under Section VII Reporting Abuse Reporting of all alleged violations to the Administrator, state agency, Adult Protective Services and to all other required agencies…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-28 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide to the resident a copy of the completed bed hold policy prior to transfer. This was evident for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for transfer and discharge. The findings include: On 6/17/24 at 9:21 AM, a review of the medical records revealed the resident was sent to the hospital on 6/14/2024. A bed hold notice was identified in the resident's paper chart. The bed hold notice had not been completed and notes [resident's son] approved Bed hold policy via phone initialed KC on the side of the form. The resident's name was not on the bed hold notice nor any of the other fields completed on the form. According to the medical record, the resident was his/her own representative. On 6/17/24 at 2:05 pm, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #23. LPN #23 was asked what is expected when notice of transfer is presented to a resident? LPN #23 responded, The resident or representative will sign the notice if they are capable. When asked if Resident #1 could sign 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 · D2024-06-28 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview with the resident, review of medical records, and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a baseline care plan summary to residents. This was evident for 1 (#85) of 5 residents reviewed for baseline care plan summaries during the survey. The Findings Include: On 6/13/24 at 11:30AM, in an interview with Resident #85, they stated they have not been invited to a care plan meeting nor received a baseline care plan summary or baseline care plan. On 6/14/24 at 1:15 PM, review of the medical record did not reveal any evidence that Resident #85 was given a baseline care plan summary or a copy of a baseline care plan. On 6/21/24 at 10:37 AM, in an interview with the Director of Social Services (DSS) #2 she stated she did not have a baseline care plan for Resident #85. During the interview, she further stated that the nurses could not find a progress note or provide any additional documentation to show as evidence that Resident #85 was given a baseline care plan or baseline care plan summary.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-28 · 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 interview and medical record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were developed and implemented. This was found to be evident for 2 (Resident #112 and Resident #85) of 18 residents reviewed for care plans during the facility's survey. Findings include: 1. A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It is used to plan, assess, and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care they receive in a facility. It should describe the resident's goals and desired outcomes, the care/services that will be furnished, the resident's discharge plans, and refusals of care and action taken by facility staff to educate the resident. Review of Resident #112's medical record revealed the resident was admitted with the following but not limited diagnosis: Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (a lifelong condition where the pancreas makes little or no insulin, which leads to high blood sugar levels). MD00203565 was reviewed on 6/25/24 at 4:00 PM for allegations of neglect in which Resident #112 reported not receiving insulin…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to provide ADL's (activities of daily living) such as showers according to the resident's preference. This was determined to be true for 1 (Resident # 44) out of 6 residents reviewed for ADL care during the survey. The findings include: At 2:50 PM on 06.18.24 the surveyor spoke with Resident #44 in his/her room. Resident was observed sitting in a wheelchair dressed in clean civilian clothes. The resident stated that s/he had recently moved from the first floor to the second floor within the last week. Resident #44 stated that he/she had received a shower only twice within the last month. This resident stated that her preference was to receive a shower twice per week. Additionally, the resident stated that he/she had discussed this concern with the unit manager and DON within the last month. On 06/20/24 at 01:56 PM Resident #44 stated that he/she was promised to receive a shower on Wednesday and Saturdays. Also, the Resident stated that he/she must be placed in a shower chair for the Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) 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 · Dcited before2024-06-28 · 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, review of medical records, and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders as evidenced by: 1) ensuring ordered ACE wraps were in place, 2) administering medication as ordered by the physician, and 3) a resident not receiving the ordered amount of oxygen. This was evident for 3 (Residents #40, #15, #37) of 9 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include: 1) On 6/13/24 during initial tours of the facility and multiple surveyor observations of Resident #40 with the last observation of the day made at 2:12 PM, Resident #40 was observed without any ACE wraps in place anywhere on the resident. Medical record review for Resident #40 on 6/14/24 at 10:20 AM revealed multiple diagnosis including lymphedema, essential (primary) hypertension, pulmonary embolism, personal history of transient ischemic attack, atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery, and chronic kidney disease, stage 4 (severe). Furthermore, Resident #40's physician orders were reviewed and noted the following, ACE wraps…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observations, review of the medical record, and interview with facility staff, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide residents with respiratory care consistent with professional standards by failing to ensure there was a physician order for oxygen administration/indication, failing to administer oxygen as prescribed, and failing to develop plans of care to address the resident's respiratory needs. This was evident for 1 (#85) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care during the investigation phase of the survey. The findings include: Oxygen flow meters are a relatively simple device that consist of a tube through which gas passes and a small, free-moving indicator such as a ball. When valves are open, the gas moves through the flow meter and causes the ball to float. A numbered scale on the tube along with the indicator allows the healthcare provider to determine the flow rate of oxygen. To ensure the most accurate reading of the flow rate, read the flow meter from a close distance, straight in front of the meter, and at eye level with the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-28 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to properly monitor medications. This was evident in 1 out of 4 medication storage rooms and carts during the survey. The findings include: During observation rounds on [DATE] at 03:05 PM the following was found in the 1st floor Unit 2 medication room: 1 expired Influenza Vaccine Afluria Quadrivalent 5ml Multi-dose Vial with an expiration date of [DATE]. During an interview and observation round of the 1st floor Unit 2 medication room with Unit Manager staff #6 on [DATE] at 03:15 PM, staff #6 stated and confirmed that there was 1 expired Influenza Vaccine Afluria Quadrivalent 5ml Multi-dose Vial.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-28 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and medical record reviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to schedule a dental appointment and arrange transportation to and from the dental appointment. This deficient practice was evident for 1 (#37) of 1 resident record reviewed for dental care during the survey. The findings include: On 06/13/24 at 9:28 am, during an interview with Resident #37, he/she reported that his/her bottom dentures were lost. He/she could not recall which staff member he/she reported the incident to, or the exact month it occurred. Review of the resident's personal belongs log in Point Click Care (PCC) revealed there was no documentation of the resident having dentures upon admission to the facility. The resident reported difficulty eating without having bottom dentures. During an interview with Director of Nursing (DON) #17 on 06/17/24 at 12:23 pm, the DON reported all resident's belongings are logged into PCC under the evaluation tabs at the time of admission, discharge, and readmissions. DON #17 explained that a grievance form would be completed for all reported…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-28 · 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 interview with facility staff, it was determined the facility failed to provide documentation whether a resident had signs and symptoms of abuse immediately following an allegation of abuse and failed to provide documentation to verify monthly pharmacy review was completed in 2024. This was evident for 3 (#508, #11, #21) of 15 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include: 1) Review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation Policy on 6/25/24 at 3:01 PM revealed in the Investigation of Alleged Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation section, Written procedures for investigations include: Focusing the investigation on determining if abuse, neglect, exploitation and/or mistreatment has occurred, the extent, and cause; and Providing complete and thorough documentation of the investigation. Further review of the policy in the Protection of Resident section, Examining the alleged victim for any sign of injury, including a physical examination or psychosocial assessment if needed . Resident #508's medical record was reviewed on 6/26/24 at 11:22 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 · Ecited before2024-01-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 observation, medical record review and interview with facility staff, it was revealed the facility failed to administer medications as ordered by the physician. This was evident for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) reviewed during the complaint survey. The findings include: Medical record review on 1/10/24 at 9am revealed that Resident #1's diagnoses included but were not limited to Dementia, Anxiety, high blood pressure, Depression and Multiple Sclerosis. According to the hospital discharge Resident #1 was admitted in October of 2022 for Physical and Occupational Therapy Rehabilitation. Review of resident #1's medical record on 1/10/24 at 2pm revealed the following: 1. On 10/3/2022 a physician ordered resident #1 to receive Amlodipine 10 mg(milligrams) at 10am every day by mouth for high blood pressure. 2. On 5/17/23 a physician ordered resident #1 to receive Seroquel 25mg at 10am every day by mouth for depression. 3. On 9/8/2023 a physician ordered resident #1 to receive Meloxicam 15mg everyday at 12noon by mouth for joint pain. Review of the MAR (Medication Administration Record)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-03 · 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 reviews of administrative records and staff interview, it was determined that the nursing administrative staff failed to conduct a yearly performance review on 2 of 6 geriatric nursing assistants for the prior 12 months. The findings include: On 08/28/19, a review of 6 random geriatric nursing assistant (GNA) for yearly performance appraisal revealed that 2 of the 6 GNA's had not had a yearly appraisal in the previous 12 months. Review of GNA #3's records revealed GNA #3's last performance appraisal was conducted on 08/14/2010. Review of GNA #1's records revealed that GNA #1's last performance appraisal was 08/20/2013. In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 08/29/19 at 12:25 PM, the facility DON confirmed that GNA #1 and GNA #3 were not given a performance appraisal for the past 12 months.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-03 · 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 of medication pass and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to obtain a medication error rate less than 5% (Resident #286). This includes 1 out of 3 residents observed for medication pass, 2 errors out of 25 opportunities with a medication error rate of 8%. The findings include: The facility uses an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for the administration and documentation of medications for administration to the residents. The physician's orders for the medications are entered in the EMR with the times of medication administration. The Five Rights of Medication Administration. One of the recommendations to reduce medication errors and harm is to use the five rights: the right patient, the right drug, the right dose, the right route, and the right time. 1. The facility staff #21 failed to administer medication to Resident # 286 as ordered by the physician. Medical record review for Resident #286 revealed the physician ordered: Prednisone 1 mg tablets, give 2 tablets po every day. Prednisone is used as an anti-inflammatory or an immunosuppressant…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-09-03 · 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 interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure medications were thoroughly labeled with residents' name and dated when the medication were open. This was evident for 2 of 4 medication carts observed during the annual survey process. The findings include: Observation of the medication cart on 08/30/19 at 8:16 AM revealed the following observation: 1. The medication cart 1 on Unit 1 had the following: insulin medications with no open dates, Humalog, Novolog and two Basaglar pens. 2. The medication cart on Unit 2 had the following: brimonidine eye drops with no open date, Plavix with no name and Ipratropium nasal spray with no open date. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 08/30/19 8:30 AM confirmed the facility staff failed to ensure medications were thoroughly labeled with residents' name and dated when open.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-03 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake 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 staff it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents had a means of directly contacting staff. This was evident for 3 pull chords in 2 resident spa rooms. The findings include: On 8/28/2019 at 8:09 AM the spa room across from room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed to have the call light in the shower suspended between the wall unit and the escutcheon plate for the shower's grab bar. This caused the pull chord to be suspended approximately 30 from the ground and not easily accessible to a resident should they fall. The toilet room within this spa room was observed with the call light chord wrapped around the grab bar preventing the alarm from activating when the chord was pulled. At 8:25 AM observation of the spa room across from room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed the pull chord in the first shower on the left was also wrapped around the grab bar preventing it from functioning properly. These findings were reported immediately to GNA #8. The Administrator and Director…
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
$8,021 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,021 — penalty dated 2024-01-11
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
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 | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 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 | 4 of 5 | 4.3 | -0.3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 515 BRIGHTFIELD ROAD HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2023 |
| AS FAMILY SD HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 58% | since 04/01/2023 |
| 515 BRIGHTFIELD ROAD PROPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| SCHWARTZ, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| MCCHENSEY, CATHY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| RAGHUNATH, ARUN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| STERN, ROCHEL | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/26/2025 |
| ACCURATE STAFFING LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| BRAND SONNENSCHINE LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| M MEISELS FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 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 $910K 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 215226. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, 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.