Complete Care At Wheaton
4011 Randolph Road, Wheaton, MD 20902 · For profit - Corporation · 116 certified beds · (301) 933-2500 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
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2025
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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) | 3 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 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 8.5% | 20.4% | 15.4% | better |
| 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 | 0.5% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 90.4% | 22.8% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 4.2% | 2.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.6% | 22.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.4% | 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 | 6.0% | 5.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.4% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.6% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 1.1% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.4% | 80.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 13.7% | 21.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.7% | 9.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.01 | 1.20 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
42.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 91 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 79.2% 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 53 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 24% 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 | 42.1%CMS range 32.4–51.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.5%CMS range 7.9–15.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 79.2% | 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 | 66.0% | 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 | 54.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 3.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.4% | 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 | 9.2%CMS range 5.7–14.2 | 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 116 beds and averages 110.9 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.38 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.83 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 3.16 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% 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 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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-21 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Geriatric Nursing Assistants (GNAs) were provided with annual performance evaluations and skills competencies. This was found to be evident for 4 (GNA #9, #10, #11, #13) out of 5 GNAs reviewed for performance evaluations and skills competencies reviewed during the recertification and complaint survey. The findings include: During a review of employee files conducted on 04/16/26 at 11:42 AM it was discovered that GNAs #9, #10, #11, and #13 did not have documentation of a current annual performance evaluation and skill competencies. During an interview conducted on 04/17/26 at approximately 10:00 AM the Regional Director of Operations (RDO)# 8 reported that the facility has had recent changes in the Human Resource department and Staff Educator/ Assistance Director of Nursing (ADON). As a result, the facility had been unable to locate the performance evaluations and skills competencies. The RDO stated that this is an opportunity to identify an area of improvement.During 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 · Ecited before2026-04-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store and label medications. This was evident in 1 of 1 medication room and 2 of 2 medication carts observed during the recertification survey process.The findings include:On 04/15/2026 at 1:49 PM during an observation conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #20 in the East Wing 1 medication room, the following was observed:Two bags of Heparin (30,000 units/1000 mL Normal Saline) labeled for Resident #8 were stored in the medication room refrigerator. Review of the pharmacy labels revealed use-by dates of 02/27/2026 and 03/02/2026; both medications were observed beyond their labeled use-by dates.One bag of Heparin (30,000 units/1000 mL Normal Saline) labeled for Resident #8 was observed stored on a shelf in the medication room. Review of the medication label indicated that refrigeration was required; however, the medication was not stored in accordance with labeled instructions.One vial of Tuberculin Purified Protein (5 IU/0.1 mL) was observed opened without a documented date of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-21 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure completion of required Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) prior to admission. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #14).The findings include:Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) is a federal requirement that ensures individuals with serious mental illness or intellectual disabilities are evaluated prior to nursing home admission to determine appropriate placement and services. A Level I PASARR is an initial screening to identify potential need, and a Level II PASARR is a comprehensive evaluation required when the Level I screen is positive.On 04/15/2026 at 11:00 AM, this surveyor conducted a record review of Resident #14's Level I PASARR screening, completed on 03/09/2026, which indicated the need for a Level II PASARR evaluation. Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]; however, record review revealed no documentation of a completed Level II PASARR in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-21 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews it was determined the facility failed to provide an activities program to meet the needs and preferences for 1 resident. This was evident for 1 (Resident #36) of 1 resident reviewed for activities during the recertification survey and complaint survey.The findings include:On 04/15/2026 at 02:18 PM, an observation was made of Resident #36 laying in bed with the TV pushed against the back wall behind the headboard of their bed. There were no other forms of activity or engagement observed in the resident's room.On 4/17/2026 at 11:53 AM, observed Resident #36 resting in bed and tv was pushed back against the wall. No other forms of activity or engagement were observed in the room. On 04/17/2026 at 12:16 PM, a review of Resident #36 documented activities in their medical record for a 30 day look back revealed the Resident was documented as watching TV for all the days except for 3/28/2026.Care plans provide direction for individualized care of the residents. A care plan is a guide that holistically addresses the unique needs of each…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to maintain Quality of Care. This was evident for 1 (#8) out of 1 Resident evaluated for quality of care during the recertification survey.The findings include:Necrotic refers to the death of cells or tissues, usually appearing as black, brown, or discolored hardened skin (eschar) or wet, sloughing tissue. Gangrene is a serious, potentially fatal condition involving tissue death (necrosis) caused by infection or lack of blood flow. Symptoms include skin discoloration (blue/black/red), pain, numbness, and foul-smelling blisters. Treatment requires immediate medical attention, often antibiotics, surgery to remove dead tissue, or amputation, alongside hyperbaric oxygen therapy.During a review of Medical Record for Resident #8 on 4/20/2026 at 1:35 PM a Nurse Practitioner Progress note written on 2/16/2026 was discovered which reported, noted necrotic toes on second and third toes on left foot - Vascular surgery consult.A Vascular Surgery consult progress note written on 2/19/2026 was found that reported 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 · Dcited before2026-04-21 · 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
Based on observation and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure staff perform appropriate hand hygiene. This was evident for 1 Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #21) of 1 LPN observed for hand hygiene during the recertification survey and complaint survey.The findings include:Hand hygiene is mandatory before putting on gloves and immediately after removing gloves to prevent cross-contamination, as gloves are not a substitute for hand hygiene. Health care workers must change gloves and perform hand hygiene when moving from a soiled to a clean body site on the same patient, or between patient contacts. The proper terms for putting on medical gloves are donning and taking off medical gloves is doffing.An observation of Resident #2's wound care was conducted on 4/20/2026 at 1:34 PM. The Surveyor observed LPN #21 provide wound care for the Resident. During the wound care observation the LPN removed the old bandage from the wound and then changed gloves however the LPN failed to perform hand hygiene between glove changes. The LPN cleansed the wound and proceeded 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 · Ecited before2025-04-10 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on surveyor record review, interviews with facility staff and Residents, it was determined that the facility failed to revise Resident care plans and conduct timely care plan meetings. This was found to be evident in 4 (Resident #10, 41, 93, and 106) out of 4 Residents reviewed for timing and revision of care planning. The findings include: 1) On the initial tour of the facility 03/31/2025 at 09:58 AM Resident #10 stated that he/she remembered attending one care plan meeting last summer and does not recall having received invitations for care plan meetings. Resident stated, I have been here for 2 years. A care plan is a document that outlines a person's healthcare or support needs, how those needs will be met, and by whom. It serves as a roadmap for providing consistent and effective care. The care plan helps organize and prioritize caregiving activities, ensures continuity of care, and promotes collaboration among healthcare providers. It is a vital tool for effective and personalized care. It ensures…
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 · D2025-04-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and medical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to invite a resident to their care plan meeting. This was evident in 1 (Resident#35) of 7 residents reviewed for care planning. The findings include: On 03/31/25 at 10:55 AM Resident #35 informed the surveyor that he/she was not invited to and did not attend care plan meetings. On 04/02/25 at 08:26 AM a review of Resident #35's medical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and care plan meetings were held on 1/30/25, 2/5/25 and 2/26/25. Resident #35 attended one care plan meeting on 1/30/25. However, the resident did not attend care plan meetings on 2/5/25 and 2/26/25. The records failed to reveal that the resident was notified. On 04/03/25 at 10:43 AM in an interview, the Regional Social Worker stated it was the practice of the facility to invite residents and their responsible parties in writing to care plan meetings. Further, she would check the records to ascertain whether Resident #35…
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 · D2025-04-10 · 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 surveyor record reviews and facility staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to offer the opportunity to complete an advance directive and provide educational materials on advance directive for Residents and/or Resident Representatives. This was found to be evident for 3 (Resident #41, 93 and 95) out of 3 Residents reviewed for advance directives. The findings include: An advance directive is a legal document that specifies a person's wishes for end-of-life healthcare. It also specifies who should make healthcare decisions on your behalf if you are unable to do so yourself. On 03/31/2025 at 11:43 AM the surveyor conducted a record review of Resident #93's medical record. During the review of Resident #93's medical record, specifically the social services assessment and documentation - V6 forms dated 8/30/2024 and 11/20/2024, it revealed documentation that Resident #93 did not have an advance directive in place, and the opportunity to complete an advance directive was not offered 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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility investigation, record review, and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident remained free of abuse. This was evident for 1 (Resident #105) of 31 abuse investigations reviewed during the survey. The facility implemented effective and thorough corrective measures following this incident prior to the start of this survey. The facility's plan and action were verified during this survey; therefore, this deficiency was found to be past noncompliance with a compliance date of 3/11/24. The findings include: On 4/2/25 at 9:00 AM, a review of the Facility- Reported incident MD00203253 revealed that on 3/5/2024 at 12:30 PM, Geriatric Nurse Assistant (GNA #8) reported to the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and alleged Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #6) of grabbing Resident #105's arm and hitting him/her on the face. On 4/3/24 at 7:45 AM, a review of Resident #105's medical records revealed a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status: an assessment used in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities to monitor cognition) score…
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 27 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and medical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notification for Residents that were transferred to the hospital. This was found to be evident for 3 Residents ( #4, #18, #48) out of 3 Residents reviewed for hospitalization. The findings include: During medical record review for Resident #48 on 04/04/25 at 11:15 AM. It was revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on 4/2/24, 8/27/24 and 8/28/24, the facility did not provide written notification to the resident or the resident ' s representative regarding the reason for the transfer to the hospital. During continued records review on 04/04/25 at 12:57 PM Resident ' s #4 record review revealed resident was transferred to the hospital on 5/18/24, 6/18/24 and 2/16/25 with no evidence that the facility provided written notification and reason for transfer to resident or resident's representative during transfer to the hospital. During an interview with the Regional Clinical Nurse Manager (RCNM) on 04/04/25 at 1:00 PM regarding written notification 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 · D2025-04-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility staff and Resident interviews and surveyor record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notification of the bed hold policy for a Resident that was transferred to the hospital. This finding was found to be evident for 1 Resident (#95) out of 1 Resident reviewed for hospitalization. The findings include: A Bed Hold is the act of holding or reserving a Resident's bed while the Resident is absent from the facility for therapeutic leave or hospitalization. It must be provided to all facility Residents regardless of payment source. The Bed Hold policy should be disclosed in the admission packet during an initial admission to the facility and it should be disclosed to Resident/Resident Representative at the time of transfer. On 04/01/2025 at 07:40 AM during the tour of the nursing unit, the surveyor interviewed Resident #95. Resident #95 stated that he/she had a recent hospitalization due to stomach collapse. The surveyor reviewed Resident #95's medical record 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 before2025-04-10 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 failed to conduct an accurate Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR). This was found evident for 1 (Resident #27) out of 1 resident reviewed for PASRR screening. The findings include: According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) is a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long-term care. Furthermore, Congress developed the PASRR program to prevent inappropriate admission and retention of people with mental disabilities in nursing facilities. Federal law mandates that Medicaid-certified nursing facilities (NF) may not admit an applicant with serious mental illness (MI), mental retardation (MR), or a related condition, unless the individual is properly screened, thoroughly evaluated, found to be appropriate for NF placement, and will receive all specialized services necessary to meet the individual's unique MI/MR needs. If a resident tests positive for a Level I, they…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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 medical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to revise a care plan. This was evident for 3 (#4, #48, and #445) out of 3 residents reviewed for care plans. The findings include: A review of a Nurse ' s note for Resident #4 was conducted on 04/02/25 at 12:43 PM. The note dated 03/04/2025 at 16:07 stated Writer went to assess the patient after receiving a verbal call from a caregiver that the patient was on the floor. Observed patient sitting near the bed and wheelchair with no visible injury. The patient denied pain upon assessment. No swelling or skin discoloration noted. The patient had a light scratch on [resident ' s gender] left side, not related to the fall but sustained while using the bathroom. The patient self-transferred from the floor to the bed. A care plan is a comprehensive, individualized plan of care developed for each resident. It outlines the residents ' medical, psychological, emotional, and social needs, as well as the goals, interventions, 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 · Dcited before2025-04-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and facility staff interview, the facility failed to 1) assess a Resident with an actual fall and 2) document a witnessed fall. This was evident for 1 (resident #445) of 1 resident reviewed for quality of care. The findings include: A fall is defined as an unintended descent to the floor or other lower surface, with or without injury to the resident or patient. This includes slips, trips, or loss of balance, whether witnessed or not, and whether or not the individual is able to get up without assistance. A fall assessment is a systematic process used by healthcare professionals to identify a patient's risk of falling and to determine contributing factors. It typically involves evaluating medical history, medications, cognitive status, mobility, gait, balance, and environmental risks. The goal is to guide the development of individualized interventions to prevent falls and improve patient safety. A nursing care plan is a structured, written document that outlines the nursing care to be provided to a patient, tailored to their specific healthcare needs 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 · D2025-04-10 · 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 observation, facility staff interviews and surveyor record review it was determined that the facility failed to follow appropriate respiratory care and services. This finding was found to be evident in 1 (Resident #93) out of 1 Resident reviewed for respiratory care and services. The findings include: On tour of the East Wing Nursing Unit on 03/31/2025 at 11:49 AM the surveyor observed Resident #93 with oxygen in use. There was an oxygen humidifier bottle and oxygen tubing attached to the oxygen concentrator and an oxygen cannula in Resident #93's nostrils. The surveyor did not observe an oxygen usage sign on the Resident door or on the doorframe of Resident #93's room. The surveyor conducted a record review of Resident #93's medical record on 04/02/2025 at 10:30 AM. The record review revealed that Resident #93 had physician orders for oxygen and to change the oxygen humidifier bottle tubing every Thursday on the night shift. Further review of the medical record revealed that Resident #93 had a care plan for oxygen therapy related to respiratory illness. In…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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 review of employee records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete annual performance reviews for Geriatric Nursing Assistants (GNAs). This was evident for 2 (#10, #17) out of 5 GNA staff members reviewed during the annual survey. The findings include: Performance evaluations are to be completed once every 12 months to identify in-service education needed to address competencies of the geriatric nursing assistants. On 04/08/25 at 1:44 PM, a review of GNA #10 and GNA #17's employee records revealed that no performance reviews for 2023 and 2024 were included. On 04/09/25 at 11:59 AM, an interview conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) confirmed that annual GNA performance evaluations for 2023 and 2024 had not been done for GNA #10 and GNA #17. At the time of exit conference, the facility did not provide any additional evidence to show that performance evaluations for 2023 and 2024 were completed for GNA #10 and GNA #17.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · 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 administration, medical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility licensed staff failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5 percent for 2 out of 2 residents ( #94 and #81). This finding was evident for 3 out of 26 opportunities observed for errors which resulted in a medication error rate of 11.54%. The findings Include: 1) On 04/02/25 at 8:20 AM, during a medication administration observation for Resident #94, the surveyors observed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 administer scheduled medications to the resident. The medications included 1 tablet Amlodipine 10 mg (milligram). LPN #1 stated, I am holding the Amlodipine due to the resident ' s heart rate of 59 and I will contact the physician. 2) During medication administration on 04/02/25 at 8:52 AM for Resident #81, the surveyors observed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 administer scheduled medications to the resident. The surveyors observed LPN #1 administer 1 drop of Brimonidine Tartrate Ophthalmic Solution 0.2% to the resident ' s right eye.…
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 before2025-04-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store medications. This was found to be evident in 2 of 2 medication storage rooms and 3 of 3 medication carts observed during the recertification survey. The findings include: During a medication cart observation conducted on 04/07/25 at 9:17 AM of the [NAME] Wing (Cart #2) with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #14, the following were observed, two Tylenol tablets and 1 Vitamin tablet were found stored in a medication cup inside the cart. LPN #14 stated that the resident initially requested the medications but later refused them and asked for Oxycodone instead. Further observations of the medication cart revealed an open, used and undated Basaglar 100-unit insulin pen, twelve 12 loose pills, 10 individually packaged Spiriva Handi Haler 18 mcg (microgram) capsules that were not labeled with a resident ' s name, and 1 individually packaged Ondansetron 4 mg (milligram) tablet also not labeled with a resident ' s name. On 04/07/25 at 9:25AM, the surveyor interviewed LPN#14…
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 · D2025-04-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and medical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dental services on a routine basis, received the necessary services in a timely manner. This was evident for 1(Resident#59) of 1 resident reviewed for dental services. The findings include: Resident #59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Dementia, and Cognitive Communication Deficit. On 03/31/25 at 09:36 AM Resident#59 informed the surveyor that he/she experienced pain when chewing food. On 04/03/25 at 10:36AM a review of Resident# 59's clinical record revealed that the resident had not seen a dentist since admission to the facility on [DATE]. On 04/07/25 at 08:20 AM the surveyor observed Resident #59 for 25 minutes eating breakfast. The resident took small bites and at the end of the 25 minutes had consumed one slice of toast, one half bowl of Oatmeal and one serving of Cheerios. Resident #59 stated that he/she experienced pain in the right jaw 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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observation, facility staff interview and facility record review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain proper sanitation for storage of food on the nursing units and in the kitchen. This was found to be evident on 1 out of 3 nursing units and on the initial tour of the kitchen during review of food storage and sanitation. The findings include: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 03/31/2025 at 08:15 AM with the Food Services Director (FSD) in attendance, the surveyor observed the following sanitation concerns: personal coffee mug on meal tray cart; employee personal items (coat, back pack and keys) in the chemical storage room; opened container of stir fry sauce, opened container of distilled vinegar and opened container of salt not dated on bottom shelf of the food prep table; no thermometer on the inside of the walk in-freezer and walk-in refrigerator (only a thermometer on the outside of walk-in freezer and refrigerator). In an interview during the initial tour of the kitchen on 03/31/2025, the Food Services Director (FSD) acknowledged the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observation and facility staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to dispose garbage and refuse properly. This finding was found to be evident during the tour of the outside dumpster area. The findings include: On 03/31/2025 at 08:55 AM the surveyor toured the outside dumpster area with the Food Services Director (FSD) in attendance. This tour revealed the observation of the dumpsters not covered with the attached lids. Additionally, next to the dumpsters were an old mattress, dresser and a soda can. In an interview on 03/31/2025 following the tour with the Food Services Director (FSD) the surveyor asked what the expectation was for the dumpsters being covered with lids. The FSD stated that the dumpsters should be covered with lids. The FSD acknowledged the surveyor and covered the dumpsters with the respective lids that were attached to the dumpsters. The surveyor reviewed the findings with the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) and the Regional Clinical Nurse Consultant on 04/09/2025 at 03:20 PM. No additional information was provided by…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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 medical record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the medical records for a resident who was required to wear a cervical collar, were maintained in the most accurate form. This was evident for 1(Resident #35) of 1 resident reviewed for cervical collar application. The findings include: A Treatment Administration Record (TAR) is an essential document in health care settings that provides detailed information about the treatments prescribed to a resident, including dosage, administration times and special instructions. It serves as a crucial tool for nurses to ensure safe and accurate treatment administration. On 04/02/25 at 7:30AM a review of Resident #35's clinical record revealed that the resident sustained a fall on 02/14/25 which resulted in a head injury. The resident was transferred to the emergency room and returned to the facility on [DATE] with a physician's order for Aspen cervical collar to remain in place at all times. May remove to check skin…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
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 failed to have the minimum required members in attendance at the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee. This was found evident during the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) and Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) review, which has the potential to affect all residents. The findings include: According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) specifies the QAA committee composition and frequency of meetings in nursing facilities and requires facilities to develop and implement appropriate plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies. On 04/10/25 at approximately 10:50 AM, the facility's QAA attendance sheets were reviewed. It was found that there were inconsistencies with attendance sheet sign-ins. For the QAPI meetings of 02/25/25 and 03/25/2025, all signatures for the federal-required employees are present except for the Infection Preventionist (IP). Attendance sheets for the dates of 10/29/2024, 02/25/2025, 01/28/2025,…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). This was evident for 1 (Resident #53) out of 1 Resident reviewed for infection control. The findings include: According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) refer to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities. Furthermore, EBP are indicated for residents with any of the following: Infection or colonization with a CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)-targeted MDRO (multi-drug resistant organism) when Contact Precautions do not otherwise apply; or Wounds and/or indwelling medical devices even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO. An indwelling urinary catheter is a thin, hollow tube that is inserted into the urethra to reach the bladder in order to drain urine into a bag. On 03/31/25 at 10:30 AM, an observation…
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 · D2025-04-10 · 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, it was determined that the facility failed to keep a sanitary environment. This was evident during the tour of the laundry room conducted as part of the facility's annual recertification survey. The findings include: On 04/01/25 at 11:31 AM the surveyor did a tour of the laundry room with the Environmental Services Supervisor (ESS) and Staff# 16. The surveyor observed the floor tiles in the room with the washing machines were visibly dirty. There were brown spills on the floor covering an area of approximately 1.5 ft x1.5ft in front of a platform where the chemicals for the washing machines were located. A brown dirt-like substance was observed throughout the length of the laundry room leading to the platform. In the clean area of the laundry room was a Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) unit with 3 rusty grille vent covers that had thick layers of dust. Staff #ESS acknowledged the findings and stated we need to do some cleaning On 04/02/25 at 07:00 AM the surveyor informed the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) of the findings in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-03-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor review of the clinical record and interviews with residents and facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure interdisciplinary care conferences, including the participation of residents. This finding was evident for 2 of 23 residents selected during the survey (Resident #64 and #73). In addition, the facility failed to ensure the revision of a comprehensive plan of care for Resident #67. This finding was evident for 1 of 23 residents selected during the survey. The findings include: 1a. On 03-08-2021 at 3:30 PM surveyor interview with Resident #64 revealed that the resident had not been invited or attended an interdisciplinary care plan conference for some time now. Further interview revealed the resident was unable to recall a date of the last conference that he/she had attended. On 03-11-2021 surveyor review of the clinical record for Resident #64 revealed documentation the resident's total Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of a 14 out of 15. BIMS is a test given by medical professionals that helps determine a 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 before2021-03-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on surveyor review of administrative files, surveyor observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure staff to identify and wear the appropriate personal protective equipment in accordance with infection control procedures. This finding was evident for 2 of 4 units in the facility (the East and Terrace units). The findings include: 1. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines published on November 20, 2020 for preparing for Covid-19 in nursing homes, HCP should wear an N95 or higher-level respirator (or facemask if a respirator is not available), eye protection (i.e., goggles or a face shield that covers the front and sides of the face), gloves, and gown when caring for these residents. Residents can be transferred out of the observation area to the main facility if they remain afebrile and without symptoms for 14 days after their admission. Testing at the end of this period can be considered to increase certainty that the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-03-12 · 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 surveyor review of the clinical record and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for residents. This finding was identified for 2 of 23 residents selected for review during the survey (Residents #30 and #76). The findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) is a mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents in Medicare or Medicaid certified nursing homes. This process provides a comprehensive and accurate assessment of each resident's functional capacity and health status to assist nursing home staff in identifying health problems. MDS assessments are required for residents on admission to the nursing facility and then periodically, within specific guidelines and time frames. 1. On 03-10-2021 surveyor review of section E (Behavior) of the MDS assessment for Resident #30, with an Assessment Reference Date 01-14-2021, revealed staff indicated that the resident had no wandering behavior for the look back assessment period of 01-08-2021 through 01-14-2021. However, further…
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 before2021-03-12 · 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 surveyor review of the clinical record, surveyor observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for residents. This finding was evident for 3 of 23 residents reviewed for care plan area during the survey (#289, #71, and #76). The findings include: 1. On 03-08-2021 at 1:51 PM surveyor observation of Resident #289 revealed a central line in place on the resident's right upper arm. A central line dressing was on the insertion site that was dated for 02-26-2021. A central line is a type of catheter for vascular access that is placed in a large vein that allows multiple intravenous (IV) fluids to be administered and blood to be drawn. On 03-08-2021 clinical record review of Resident #289 revealed facility staff had a comprehensive care plan initiated for the resident's central line. Per the care plan, the central line dressing was to be changed every seven (7) days per physician order. The next central line dressing was due to be changed on 03-5-2021. However as of 03-08-2021, the care plan…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-03-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record and interview with Resident #62's representative and facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure standards of professional practice for Resident #62. This was evident for 1 of 23 residents selected for review during the survey. The findings include: On 03-08-2021 A review of Resident #62's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube (PEG) to receive artificial nutrition. A PEG tube is used to provide a route for artificial nutrition, hydration, and medication administration in residents who are likely to have prolonged inadequate or absent oral intake. Further review of Resident #62's clinical record revealed that page 2 of the resident's Maryland Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) was completed on 04-16-2020 by the resident's attending physician. Page 2, section 7C was selected by the physician, which states that, may give fluids for artificial…
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 before2021-03-12 · 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 surveyor review of the clinical record, surveyor observations, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to follow physician orders for residents. This finding was evident for 2 of 23 residents reviewed during survey (#289 and #71). The findings include: 1. On 03-08-2021 clinical record review of Resident #289 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a central line located in the resident's right upper arm. A central line is a type of catheter for vascular access that is placed in a large vein that allows multiple intravenous (IV) fluids to be administered and blood to be drawn. Further record review revealed the attending physician ordered for staff to change the central line dressing every seven (7) days. The next central line dressing was scheduled to be changed on 03-5-2021; However, surveyor observation on 03-08-2021 at 1:51 PM revealed that the central line dressing on Resident #289's right upper arm was dated for 02-26-2021. 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 · D2021-03-12 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor review of the clinical record, and interview with Resident #76 and staff, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide treatment/devices to maintain the hearing of 1 of 1 resident reviewed for the hearing and vision area during the survey (Resident #76). The findings include: On 03-08-2021 at 11:00 AM, surveyor interview of Resident #76 revealed the resident was having difficulty in hearing the surveyor. The resident on multiple times asked the surveyor to repeat questions and to speak louder. The resident informed the surveyor that he/she had hearing deficits in both ears. Further interview revealed that a hearing exam had been completed while in the facility, and was told that hearing aids were needed. However, the resident had never received the hearing aids. On 03-09-2020 surveyor review of the clinical record review of Resident #76 revealed that a hearing exam was completed on 03-23-2020. Further review of the results revealed the recommendation for hearing aids on both ears and for a medical consult to obtain clearance for the hearing aids.…
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 · D2021-03-12 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on surveyor review of the clinical record and interviews with the facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to address a significant weight loss for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for nutrition during the survey (Resident #52). The findings include: On 03-09-2021, surveyor review of Resident #52's clinical record revealed the resident experienced a significant weight loss during the time frame from April to May 2020. On 04-10-2020, the resident weighed 138.1 lbs. On 05-5-2020, Resident #2's weight was 121.8 pounds. This is an 11.8% decrease in weight. There was no documented evidence that the facility had addressed any nutritional or therapeutic interventions for the resident's change in weight. On 03-11-2021 at 4:30 PM, surveyor interview with the facility's dietician revealed that she had started working at the facility in July 2020, which is when she started to monitor Resident #52's weight. She stated that she introduced interventions for the resident at that time. On 03-11-2021 at 5:00 PM, interview of the Director of Nursing revealed no additional information.
- Potential for harm · D2021-03-12 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility's pharmacist failed to identify and/or report a gradual dose reduction (GDR) of a psychotropic medication irregularity for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications Review during the survey (Resident #79). The findings include: On 03-11-2021 surveyor review of Resident #79's clinical record revealed a progress note from a psychiatric staff member on 10-22-20 who recommended a change in the GDR of the resident's psychotropic medication Seroquel from 0.5 mg in the morning and 1 mg at bedtime (a total of 1.5 mg), to 0.5 mg two times (A total of 1 mg). Further review of Resident #79's clinical record revealed an order dated 10-22-2020 for 0.5 mg of the psychotropic medication to be administered two times a day. However, a review of the October and November 2020 Medication Administration Records (MARs) revealed the 1 mg bedtime dose continued to be administered by facility staff in addition to the 0.5mg administered twice a day until 11-13-2020. Additional review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-03-12 · 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 clinical record review and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure 1 of 5 residents reviewed for the Unnecessary Medications remained free of an unnecessary psychotropic medication (Resident #71). The findings include: On 03-11-2021 surveyor review of Resident #79's clinical record revealed a progress note from a psychiatric staff member on 10-22-2020 that recommended a Gradual Dose Reduction (Gradual Dose Reduction) of a psychotropic medication from 0.5 mg in the morning and 1 mg at bedtime (a total of 1.5 mg in a day), to 0.5 mg two times a day (a total of 1 mg a day) as a GDR attempt. Further review of Resident #79's clinical record revealed an order dated 10-22-2020 for the psychotropic medication Seroquel 0.5 mg to be administered two times a day. However, a review of the October and November 2020 Medication Administration Records (MARs) revealed that the full 1 mg dose at bedtime and the 0.5 mg twice daily (for a total of 2 mg per day). On 03-11-2021 at 3:00 PM surveyor interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing…
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 before2021-03-12 · 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 surveyor review of the clinical record, surveyor observation and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure accurate documentation in the clinical record for 1 of 23 residents reviewed during the survey (Resident #71). The findings include: On 03-09-2021 surveyor review of the clinical record of Resident #71 revealed Registered Nurse (RN) #3 had documented on the March 2021 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) that she had changed Resident #71's midline dressing on 03-08-2021. A midline is a peripherally inserted line, a type of vascular access. The midline catheter is advanced and placed so that the catheter tip is level or near the level of the axilla and distal to the shoulder. However, on 03-09-2021 at 9:26 AM, surveyor observation revealed Resident #71's midline dressing was dated for 3-01-2021. On 03-10-2021 at 7:42 AM, an interview with RN #3 revealed that she had documented Resident #71's midline dressing change on 03-08-2021 on the TAR in error. On 03-09-2021 at 5:10 PM, an interview with the East/Terrace unit manager…
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 COMPLETE CARE — 85 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 | 3.1 | +1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 84 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 84; 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC MD5 OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/01/2023 |
| PC MD5 TOPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2023 |
| SMS 2021 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2023 |
| DES CAPITAL LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| JRK INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| KLUGMAN, JACOB | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| STEIN, SHALOM | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| STERNBUCH, DANIEL | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| BATES, KIMBERLY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/31/2025 |
| BHARAJ, NARENDER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| COX, VICKIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| MANSFIELD, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| NABI, ABDOULATIF | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/18/2023 |
| SILVERBERG, NISANEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| SCHONFELD, AKIVA | Individual | TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ADESSE HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ADESSE MD PEACE MD5 PROPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| ADESSE MD5 PROPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| HC FAMILY TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| MD 4 PROPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| PEACE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| WHEATON MD PROPCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 38 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
12 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 86% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $608K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
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 215025. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-21, 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.