Fallsview Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
199 Powerville Road, Boonton, NJ 07005 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 117 certified beds · (973) 334-2454 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 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 | 5.3% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 4.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 19.3% | 12.1% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.3% | 2.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.8% | 8.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.5% | 18.8% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.5% | 97.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.5% | 5.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.5% | 15.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.3% | 12.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 51.0% | 80.1% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.5% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 4.5% | 8.1% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.87 | 2.07 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.42 | 1.11 | 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.
46.2% 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 163 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 71.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 87 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 65% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 46.2%CMS range 39.0–55.1 | 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 | 12.9%CMS range 9.7–16.4 | 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 | 71.3% | 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 | 66.7% | 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 | 59.8% | 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 | 93.0% | 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 | 96.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.8% | 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 | 1.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 9.8%CMS range 6.6–13.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.05 | 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 117 beds and averages 85.0 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 32 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.49 is at or above 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.04 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · H2023-07-28 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint # NJ00164623 Based on interviews, record review, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free of significant medication errors regarding the administration of anti-anxiety medication in accordance with the physician's order to prevent an adverse outcome for Resident #390. The facility failed to ensure that nurses administered medication to Resident #390 in accordance with professional standards of nursing practice. The significant medication errors were administered by two different nurses on three different days on 5/27/23, 5/29/23, and 5/30/23 when the anti-anxiety medication Klonopin was administered more than quadruple the prescribed medication dosage on each day to Resident #390 that resulted in the resident experiencing serious adverse effects of low blood pressure (less than 90/60 mmHg [milliliters of mercury]), increased congestion, pale, and hypoxia (an absence of enough oxygen in the tissues to sustain bodily…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-03-19 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — widespreadEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint: 423561Repeat DeficiencyBased on observations, interviews, record review, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident's dietary preferences were consistently provided for 5 of 6 residents (Resident #47, #68, #75, #78, and #106) reviewed for dietary preferences during meal observations. This deficient practice was evidenced as follows:1. On 3/15/26 at 9:20 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #47 in their room, sitting in a wheelchair (WC) eating breakfast. Resident #47 stated they were missing items from their tray. Surveyor observed Resident #47's breakfast tray ticket and tray. Resident #47 was missing a biscuit, one packet (pkt) of pepper and one pkt of ketchup. On 3/16/26 at 1:05 PM, the surveyor reviewed the electronic medical record (EMR) for Resident #47.The admission Record (AR) (a summary of important information about the resident) documented the resident had diagnoses that included but were not limited to protein calorie…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-10-02 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — widespreadEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident's dietary preferences were consistently implemented and correct diet consistency was followed for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #8, #19, and #51) reviewed for dietary preferences. This deficient practice was evidenced as follows: 1. On 9/26/24 at 08:35 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #8 in their room, awake in bed. During the interview, Resident #8 stated their meal trays are usually missing items and/or have incorrect items. Resident #8's breakfast tray arrived during the interview. Resident #8's breakfast ticket stated the resident was on a regular diet with a ground consistency (ground consistency are food that should be soft, moist, and cohesive in texture. Meats should be finely chopped, and vegetables should mash easily with a fork.) The surveyor observed Resident #8's tray were missing a 4 ounce (oz) pureed fruit cup and a 4 oz apple/cran-orange juice as indicated in their meal ticket. The surveyor further observed a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-02 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policies, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain proper kitchen sanitation practices in a manner that would prevent food borne illnesses. This deficient practice was observed and evidenced by the following: On 9/25/24 at 09:41 AM, the surveyor in the presence of the Food Service Director (FSD) observed the following during the kitchen tour: 1. The juice dispensing machine was observed with 3 of 6 juice plastic tubes that lead from the juice concentrate to the juice dispenser, with a sticky substance covering the tubes. The FSD stated the tubing should always be clean and free of any debris. 2. In walk-in refrigerator #1, the surveyor observed the fans, fan grates and panels with a dark colored dust like debris. 3. In the walk-in freezer, the surveyor observed large ice and frost build up on the fans, walls, and ceiling. The FSD could provide an information why the frost build up occurred. On 9/26/24 the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) provided the surveyor with two undated facility policies, titled,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan (CP) for one (1) of 18 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered CP. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 09/25/24, at 10:20 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #75 in their room seated in bed wearing a nasal cannula (a medical device to provide supplemental oxygen therapy to people who have lower oxygen levels) (NC) connected to an oxygen (O2) concentrator at three (3) lpm which reflected on the O2 regulator. On 09/26/24 at 10:19 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #75's electronic medical record, which revealed the following information: The resident's admission Record (an admission summary) revealed that Resident #75 was admitted with diagnoses that included but were not limited to Respiratory failure unspecified by Hypoxia (lack of oxygen). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (Q/MDS), dated [DATE], indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to administer oxygen therapy according to the physician's order for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #30 and #75) reviewed for Oxygen use. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 09/25/24 at 11:35 AM and on 09/26/24 at 11:30 AM, the surveyor observed on both days that Resident #30 was lying in bed, wearing a nasal cannula (a medical device to provide supplemental oxygen therapy to people who have lower oxygen levels) (NC) connected to an oxygen (O2) concentrator at two (2) liters per minute (lpm) on the regulator. On 09/25/24 at 12:01 PM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #30's electronic medical record, which revealed the following information: The resident's admission Record (an admission summary) (AR) documented that Resident #30 was admitted with diagnoses that included but were not limited to unspecified Dementia (impairment of memory). The Annual Minimum Data Set (A/MDS), an assessment tool used to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a medication was administered according to the physician orders (PO) and acceptable standards of practice in accordance with the New Jersey Board of Nursing. This deficient practice was identified in 1 (one) of 4 (four) residents (Resident #61) observed during the medication observation pass. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: Reference: New Jersey Statutes Annotated, Title 45. Chapter 11. Nursing Board. The Nurse Practice Act for the State of New Jersey states: The practice of nursing as a registered professional nurse is defined as diagnosing and treating human responses to actual and potential physical and emotional health problems, through such services as case-finding, health teaching, health counseling, and provision of care supportive to or restorative of life and wellbeing, and executing medical regimens as prescribed by a licensed or otherwise legally authorized physician or dentist. Reference: New Jersey Statutes Annotated, Title 45, Chapter 11.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · 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, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to properly label, store, and dispose of medications in two (2) of four (4) medication carts inspected. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 10/1/24 at 10:15 AM, the surveyor inspected the first-floor medication cart #2 in the presence of a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN#1). The surveyor observed an opened vial of Lantus insulin with an opened date of 8/24/24 and was expired. At that time, the surveyor interviewed LPN#1 who acknowledged that Lantus Insulin vial which was opened on 8/24/24 and was expired. She stated to the surveyor that Lantus insulin once opened had a 28-day expiration date. On 10/1/24 at 10:25 AM, the surveyor inspected the 1st floor medication cart #1 in the presence of LPN#2. The surveyor observed an unopened bottle of Xalatan eye drops (medication for pressure in the eye) that was not dated and was stored in the medication cart and an opened vial of Lantus insulin that contained no opened date. At that time, the surveyor interviewed LPN#2 who…
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 before2023-07-28 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint # NJ00164623 Based on interview, record review, and review of other pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a) medication was accurately received, administered, and reconciled against the physician order prior to administration which contributed to a repeated administration of an incorrect dose to and proper disposal of Clonazepam (Klonopin; a hazardous, controlled substance/narcotic medication (med) to prevent and treat anxiety disorder), for Resident #390, b) accurate signing for a medication in the electronic medication administration record (eMAR), accurate accounting, dispensing, and administration of a controlled substance med, and med was administered according to physician orders and acceptable standards of practice, for Resident #78 and #47. This deficient practice was identified for three (3) of (3) residents (Resident #390, Resident #78, and Resident #47) reviewed for Clonazepam. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: Reference: New…
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 · E2023-07-28 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, record review, and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident did not receive an unnecessary medication by following the pharmacy consultant recommendations for 1 (one) of 6 (six) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #31). The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 7/24/23 at 11:06 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #31 lying in a low to the ground bed. The surveyor reviewed Resident #31's electronic medical record which revealed the following. A review of Resident #31's admission Record (AR, an admission summary) reflected that the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included but were not limited to Parkinson's disease (a brain disorder that causes unintended or uncontrollable movements, such as shaking, stiffness, and difficulty with balance and coordination), anemia (problem of not having enough healthy red blood cells or hemoglobin to carry oxygen to the body's tissues) and schizophrenia (A disorder that affects a person'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 · D2023-07-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a physician's order was followed and perform hand hygiene appropriately during a wound treatment observation for 1 (one) of 1 (one) resident, (Resident #31) reviewed for pressure ulcer. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 7/24/23 at 11:06 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #31 lying in a low to the ground bed. The surveyor observed a wound vacuum machine on the bedside table and there was a tubing that was connected to Resident #31. The surveyor reviewed Resident #31's electronic medical record which revealed the following: The admission Record (or face sheet; an admission summary) reflected that the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included but were not limited to Parkinson's disease (a brain disorder that causes unintended or uncontrollable movements, such as shaking, stiffness, and difficulty with balance and coordination), anemia (problem of not having enough healthy red blood cells or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-28 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY NJ00164623 Based on interviews, record review, and review of facility provided documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that two (2) Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN #1 and #2) and one (1) Registered Nurse (RN) had Medication Pass Observation (MPO) competencies to provide nursing care for residents' needs. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: A review of the facility provided Medication Error Incident Report ([NAME]) for 5/27/23 date of error showed that it was the RN who had a medication error of Klonopin (anti-anxiety medication) for Resident #390 and was given a written warning. In addition, the 5/29/23 and 5/30/23 dates of error in the [NAME] showed that it was LPN#1 who had a medication error of Klonopin for Resident #390 and was given a written warning. Further review of the 5/27/23, 5/29/23, and 5/30/23 dates of medication errors, included in the [NAME] revealed that on the explanation/reason medication error was made by the RN and LPN#1: Resident was previously…
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 · D2023-07-28 · 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
Complaint # NJ00164623 Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility provided documents, it was determined that the facility failed to identify medication irregularity during the monthly MRR (Medication Record Review) of the CP (Consultant Pharmacist) for two (2) of three (3) residents, (Resident #390 and Resident #78) reviewed for Clonazepam (or Klonopin; antianxiety medication). This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: A review of the manufacturer's specifications for Klonopin included the following: Geriatric Use, Clinical studies of Klonopin did not include sufficient numbers of subjects aged 65 and over to determine whether they respond differently from younger subjects. Other reported clinical experience has not identified differences in responses between the elderly and younger patients. In general, dose selection for an elderly patient should be cautious, usually starting at the low end of the dosing range, reflecting the greater frequency of decreased hepatic, renal, or cardiac function, and of concomitant disease or other drug…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-10-02 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately reflect the resident status in the Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care in accordance with the federal guidelines for one (1) of 18 residents (Resident #71) reviewed for the accuracy of MDS coding. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 09/25/24 at 11:05 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #71 seated in bed with the indwelling catheter (closed sterile system with a catheter and retention balloon that is inserted either through the urethra or suprapubically to allow for bladder drainage) inside a privacy bag, draining yellowish urine. The resident was able to respond to surveyor's inquiry. On 09/30/24 at 09:35 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #71's electronic medical record, which revealed the following information: The resident's admission Record (an admission summary) (AR) documented that Resident #71 was admitted with diagnoses that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2023-07-28 · tag F0640 — widespreadEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to transmit the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments in a timely manner. This deficient practice was identified for 1 (one) of 1 (one) residents, (Resident#7) reviewed timeliness of MDS transmission according to the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Manual. The evidence was as follows: According to the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Guide Version 1.17.1, October 2019 which included that RAI OBRA (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act)-Required Assessment Summary: Discharge Assessment Return Not Anticipated and Discharge Return Anticipated transmission date no later than MDS completion date + 14 days calendar days. On 7/25/23, the surveyor reviewed the most recent MDS, an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care, for the timeliness of submission for 1 (one) system-selected resident. The review revealed the following for the resident: Resident #7 had an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/02/23. The assessment was completed on 02/07/23. The MDS was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 ALLAIRE HEALTH SERVICES — 20 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 3.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CUSTOMERS BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 10/25/2022 |
| SHAH, UMANG | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 10/25/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $895K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NJ
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 New Jersey 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 315492. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-02, 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.