Wynwood Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center

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

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.

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.

52.6% 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 102 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 58.7% 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 63 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 33% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 66% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 114 beds and averages 107.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.58 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.26 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.67 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.29 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · L2024-07-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — widespread
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of pertinent documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure a consistent and safe smoking process for 17 residents who were identified as smokers by failing to ensure a) provision of adequate and consistent supervision for residents who were assessed and identified as smokers, b) residents who required close monitoring when smoking, did not keep their own lighting materials and then used it to light other residents' cigarettes (Resident #30 and #72), c) residents who required close monitoring and supervision while smoking, were assisted and supervised to prevent embers from the cigarettes from causing burn holes and ensuring the lit cigarette was not rested on the smoking apron causing cinder type marks (Resident #29), and d.) extinguishing cigarettes into appropriate receptacles and that cigarette ashes were appropriately disposed of. This deficient practice was identified for 5 of 17 residents (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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · K2024-07-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
  Protect 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, review of medical records (MRs), other facility documentation, and review of facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to a.) protect residents from physical and sexual abuse as well as b.) ensure adequate supervision for a severely cognitively impaired resident (Resident #84) with a history of wandering, from wandering into other resident rooms, leading to physical altercations and sexual abuse involving other residents. Due to the vulnerable nature of the nursing home population, there is a potential for serious injury or serious physical or psychosocial impairment from being physically shoved by Resident #152 and Resident #94 as well as Resident #84 sexually abusing residents. This required immediate action to prevent further events of physical and sexual abuse by or to Resident #84 or other residents. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 9 residents reviewed for abuse. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation began on 06/04/24, and was identified on 07/01/24.…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · H2024-07-15 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — pattern
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  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 #s NJ 163250, NJ 170219 Based on observation, interview, record review and review of other pertinent documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a thorough and complete investigation was completed to determine the causal factor of injuries of unknown origin to ensure that resident abuse or neglect had not occurred for: a) a resident (Resident #150) who was found on 12/05/23, with an infected wound that required hospitalization on 12/05/23, and was diagnosed with osteomyelitis, and again observed during routine wound rounds on 12/19/23, with exposed bone and required transfer to the hospital on the same day, and was diagnosed with a acute fractures of the right proximal tibia and fibular diaphyses (two long thigh bones) on 12/19/23, b) an allegation of sexual abuse by Resident #94 that was reported to the Licensed Practical Nurse on 6/28/24 at 7:30 AM, the facility did not investigate the allegation until 7/1/24, c) and for a resident who had a history of being combative with care,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-07-15 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  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 interview, record review, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to: a.) implement interventions to prevent the development of a stage IV facility acquired pressure injury, b.) ensure individualized comprehensive care plan interventions were implemented to prevent facility acquired pressure injury wound from worsening, and c.) ensure daily observation during wound care was documented according to professional standards of Nursing practice to follow continuity of care, and d) alert physician of any change in the wound condition. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 2 closed records reviewed for wounds (Resident #150). Resident #150 was identified as having a skin tear to the left lower leg at the facility on 10/09/23, which measured 2 centimeters (cm) x 2 cm x 0.2 cm which progressed to necrotic exposed bone protruding through the right lower extremity which was identified during routine wound rounds by a consultant on 12/19/23, and which resulted in 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and review of facility documents it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment in resident rooms and designated facility utility areas. The deficient practice was identified on 2 of 3 units. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 12/01/2025 at 1:14 PM while in Resident # 89's room, the surveyor observed linens on the floor and a pile of debris that appeared to be swept but was left and not discarded. On 12/02/2025 at 12:17 PM, in the Soiled Utility room near room [ROOM NUMBER], the surveyor observed filled trash bags left on the floor in the room and not in the container. On the same date at 12:26 PM, the surveyor observed a linen cart outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] with personal bags, including a purse, on the top shelf among the clean linens and incontinence briefs. On 12/04/2025 at 11:12 AM, the surveyor observed a trash can with no bag liner in room [ROOM NUMBER]-1. On 12/05/2025 during an interview with the…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0636 — isolated
  Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
  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 interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to complete the Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS), a periodic and federally mandated, standardized assessment tool, within the required time frame. This deficient practice was identified for 2 of 11 residents (Residents #30 and Resident #40) reviewed for Resident Assessment and was evidenced by the following: Reference: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Version 3.0 Manual classified the Observation (Look Back) Period as the time period over which the resident's condition or status was to be captured by the MDS. The Assessment Reference Date (ARD) referred to the last day of the observation (or look back) period that the assessment covered for the resident. At a minimum, facilities are required to complete a comprehensive assessment for each resident within 14 calendar days after admission to the facility, when there is a significant change in the resident's status and not less than…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0638 — isolated
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  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 interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to complete the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (QMDS), a periodic and federally mandated, standardized assessment tool, within the required time frame. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 11 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for Resident Assessment and was evidenced by the following: Reference: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Version 3.0 Manual classified the Observation (Look Back) Period as the time period over which the resident's condition or status was to be captured by the MDS. The Assessment Reference Date (ARD) referred to the last day of the observation (or look back) period that the assessment covered for the resident. The Quarterly assessment was considered timely if 1). The Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of the Quarterly MDS was within 92 days after the ARD of the previous MDS and; 2). the completion date was no later than 14 days after the ARD. The following…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure 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 review of medical records and other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 2 of 32 residents reviewed, Resident #8 and Resident #51. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following:A review of the admission Record for Resident #8 which reflected that the resident was admitted with diagnoses that included Schizophrenia and Depression. A review of the level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) revealed Resident #8 was positive for a mental illness. A review of Resident #8's Significant Change MDS dated [DATE] revealed that the section indicating if the resident currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition, was coded as zero (0), indicating that Resident #8 does not currently have a mental illness or intellectual disability. When interviewed on 12/05/2025 at 10:07AM, the Regional…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications for a discharged resident were properly removed from the medication storage area. The deficient practice was identified for 1 of 3 medication carts inspected during the Medication Storage and Labeling task. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 12/02/2025 at 12:48 PM, the surveyor inspected Medication Cart 1 located outside of room [ROOM NUMBER]. At that time, in the presence of Licensed Practical Nursing # 1 (LPN # 1), the surveyor discovered a medication card for Gabapentin 100 milligram capsules located behind the bottom drawer of the cart. The medication card contained 16 remaining capsules and belonged to a resident who had been previously discharged from the facility. At that time, LPN # 1 said they should not have been in there because discharged resident's medications are returned to the pharmacy. The facility did not provide a policy regarding medication storage. N.J.A.C.…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard 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

  Complaint # 408484Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident records were accurate and complete for 1 of 3 residents (Resident # 9 reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care, specifically related to shower documentation. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following:A review of Resident #9's medication administration record (MAR) for the month of November 2025 revealed that nurses had documented that Resident #9 received showers on the following dates:11/04/202511/07/202511/11/202511/14/202511/18/202511/21/202511/25/202511/28/2025 A review of Resident # 9's documentation survey report for the month of November 2025 revealed that the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA), had documented that Resident # 9 had refused a shower on 11/04/2025.The CNA's documented that Resident # 9 received showers on 11/18/2025 and 11/21/2025. The rest of the November dates were documented as not applicable (NA). During an interview on 12/04/2025 at 10:12 AM with the surveyor, the unit manager (UM) and assistant director of nursing (ADON) said…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0917 — isolated
  Make sure each resident has 1) at least one window to the outside in a room; 2) a room at or above ground level; 3) adequate bedding; 4) furniture that meets the resident's needs; or 5) adequate closet space.
  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, and interview the facility failed to ensure resident beds and mattress were properly positioned and adjusted to meet residents' needs and ensure safety and comfort foe 1 of 2 residents (Resident # 118) observed for positioning. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: During initial tour on 12/01/2025 at 10:04 AM the surveyor observed Resident #118 in bed with their feet extended over the mattress and their ankles resting on the foot board.Resident #118 stated he/she can't sleep at night because his/her feet are always hanging off the bed. Resident #118 said he/she thinks the told a nurse about the bed being too small.A review of Resident # 118 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed under section C that Resident # 118 had a BIMS score of 14 indicating intact cognition. The MDS also revealed under section K that Resident # 118 had a height of 72 inches. During an interview on 12/04/2025 at 10:06 AM with the surveyor, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-09 · tag F0924 — isolated
  Put firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observations on 12/02/2025 in the presence of the facility's Maintenance Assistant (MA), it was determined that the facility failed to provide hand rails on both sides of the corridor. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 104 Residents in the facility.Observation on 12/02/2025 the surveyor observed, measured and recorded a six foot- nine inch (6'-9) section of wall in the South wing adjacent to the Physical Therapy area with no evidence of a hand rail for Residents to use.The MA confirmed the finding at the time of observation.The Administrator and MA were informed of the Life Safety Code deficiency during the survey exit at approximately 1:30 PM.NJAC 8:39-31.4 (a).

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-07-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — widespread
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure dependent residents were provided with routine and appropriate incontinence care and nail care in a timely manner. This deficient practice was identified for 8 of 8 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living Care (Residents #27, #30, #37, #41, #82, #94,# 95, and #155) and was evidenced by the following: 1) On 6/27/24 at 10:48 AM, surveyor #1 entered Resident #94's room and noted a strong odor of feces in the room. Resident #94 informed the surveyor that staff refused to assist with incontinence care. Upon request, Resident #94's roommate activated the call bell. The Licensed Practical Nurse/ Unit Manager (LPN/UM) reported to the room immediately, and confirmed that Resident #94 needed to be changed. 2) On 6/27/24 at 11:06 AM, surveyor #1 observed Resident #82 in bed with fingernails long, jagged with a black coated substances underneath the fingernails. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-07-15 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespread
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Complaint #167264 Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure sufficient and competent staff were available to a) provide timely and appropriate incontinence care for residents who were dependent on staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) care (Residents #94, #30, #37, #41, #95, and #27), b) provide nail care for a resident who was dependent of staff for ADL's (Resident #82) and c) ensure staff were competent to accurately document an allegation of sexual abuse and alert the supervisor. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents and was evidenced by the following: Refer to 600 K and 677F a) On 6/27/24 at 10:48 AM, surveyor #1 was doing the initial tour of the facility and was informed by Resident #94 that staff refused to change them. The surveyor noted a foul odor in the room. The call bell was activated by the roommate and the Unit Manager Licensed Practical Nurse (UMLPN) reported to the room immediately and confirmed Resident #94 was soiled with excrement. 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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

Fines & penalties

$103,300 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $103,300 — penalty dated 2024-07-15

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ATLAS HEALTHCARE — 29 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $3.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NJ