No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Complete Care At Clark LLC

1213 Westfield Avenue, Clark, NJ 07066 · For profit - Corporation · 140 certified beds · (732) 396-7100 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (732) 396-7100 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited May 20251 actual-harm citation$25,753 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • 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
  • the CMS record shows $25,753 in federal fines (most recent 2023-11-06)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
100 Commerce Pl · (732) 499-0606 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1060 Raritan Rd · (732) 340-0081 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Acme0.2 mi
1060 Raritan Rd · (732) 340-0056 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Westfield Ave. · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
787 Featherbed Ln · (732) 574-8600

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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased5.2%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.0%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.7%12.1%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained1.1%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.1%2.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.6%8.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.6%18.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.0%97.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.3%5.4%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control1.9%15.6%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.1%12.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.9%80.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.6%24.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.2%8.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.182.071.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.961.111.80better

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.

63.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 364 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

63.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
76.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.30U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 76.7% 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 163 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 47% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF63.8%CMS range 57.7–68.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.5%CMS range 8.1–13.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge76.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge68.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge59.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.4%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.9%CMS range 4.7–10.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.071.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.27
RN hours/ resident / day
1.16
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.06
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.49
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.14
RN hoursweekends
37.8%
Total nursing turnover
53.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 140 beds and averages 133.6 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.56 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.32 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-15)
8
at the previous standard inspection (2023-11-06)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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 · G2023-11-06 · 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 observation, interview, record review and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that preventative measures to prevent and promote healing of a facility acquired stage III (full thickness tissue loss) pressure ulcer to the coccyx (tailbone) were in place and consistently followed as well as follow facility policy and procedures for Prevention of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 27) who was assessed with intact skin on 10/5/23 and identified with a stage III pressure ulcer on 10/8/23 (3 days later). The wound required excisional debridement (removal of dead tissue using a blade or scalpel) on 10/23/23 and was assessed as worsening on 10/30/23. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 10/31/23 at 11:46 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #27 in their room in the presence of a second surveyor. The resident was dressed, groomed and seated in a wheelchair. 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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop 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

    Complaint #2636077Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of pertinent facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan (CP) that included two-hour checks for assistance with toileting. The deficient practice was identified for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for Care Plans.On 10/23/25 at 10:40 AM, the surveyor interviewed Resident #1 in their room. Resident #1 revealed the facility staff has not been checking on them every two hours as per their care plan. Resident further revealed there was a sign in sheet that confirms the checks were not being completed. Surveyor reviewed the daily sign in sheets from 10/13/25 through 10/23/25 which confirmed multiple missing checks on Resident #1. A review of Resident #158's Face sheet (FS) (an admission summary) revealed the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic disease that is characterized by high levels of sugar in the blood), acute kidney failure (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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure Licensed Practical Nurse's (LPN) followed the physician's order (PO) in accordance with professional standards of nursing practice for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #58) reviewed for unnecessary medications. 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. Nursing Board. The Nurse Practice Act for the State of New Jersey states: The practice of nursing as a licensed practical nurse…

    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 · E2025-05-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide 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

    COMPLAINT #NJ00183738 Based on observation, interview, record review and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services in accordance with professional standards by not ensuring; a.) timely administration and accurate documentation of a medication (Fluticasone-Salmeterol Inhalation Aerosol (Advair Inhaler) (a combination medication used to reduce inflammation and open airways) for one (1) of 12 residents, (Resident #173), reviewed for medication management for 14 out of 50 doses and b.) proper technique was performed for administration of an Insulin pen injector by one (1) of three (3) nurses who administered medications to one (1) of five (5) residents, (unsampled Resident #110), during the medication administration observation. The deficient practices were 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…

    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 · D2025-05-15 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, employee file review, and review of other pertinent documents, it was determined that the facility failed to implement their abuse policy to ensure a criminal background check was completed for one (1) of ten (10) newly hired staff (Licensed Practical Nurse #1) reviewed for criminal background checks. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 5/14/25, the surveyor reviewed ten (10) randomly selected new employee files which revealed the following: - LPN #1 had a date of hire (DOH) of 1/28/24. Review of the file revealed a physical dated 1/29/24, a criminal background check dated 10/10/22, and reference checks dated 1/9/24 and 1/19/24. On 5/14/25 at 2:10 PM, during a meeting with the survey team, the Regional Nurse Consultant (RNC) and the Regional Director of Operations (RDO) confirmed LPN #1 was onboarded (hired) by the facility on 1/28/24. They stated prior to that date, she worked at the facility but was employed by an agency. The RNC confirmed that LPN #1 was officially employed by the facility on 1/28/24. On 5/15/25 at 10:31 AM, 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-11-06 · tag F0641 — pattern
    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 2. The surveyor reviewed Resident #109's records. The resident was discharged from the facility and according to the Discharge Return not Anticipated MDS dated [DATE], the resident was assessed as being discharged to the hospital. A review of Resident #109's discharge summary and progress notes, dated 7/31/23, the resident was discharged to home/lesser care and was picked up by a family member. On 11/02/23 at 11:45 AM, the surveyor interviewed the MDSC, who stated that the MDS for Resident #109, dated 7/31/23, should have been accurately coded for discharge to home and not hospitalization. During an interview on 11/2/23 at 1:41 PM, the surveyor brought the above concerns to the attention of the Regional Director of Nursing, Director of Nursing and Administrator. NJAC 8:39-11.1, 11.2(e)1 Based on the interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to code the Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care of all residents, accurately for 2 of 31…

    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 · Ecited before2023-11-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of other pertinent documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to (a.) ensure medication and treatment were administered in accordance with professional standards of clinical practice and (b.) monitor behavior for anti-psychotic, anti-anxiety, and anti-depressant medications. The deficient practice was identified for 7 of 29 residents (Residents #41, 68, 50, 67, 6, 33, and #54). The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. The surveyor reviewed the medical records for Resident #41 which revealed the following: Resident #41 had diagnoses which included but not limited to anxiety, dementia (memory loss) with behavioral disturbance and major depressive disorder. According to the Physician Orders (PO) on 11/20/22, Resident #41 had a PO to monitor for behaviors for antianxiety and antidepressant medications. The October 2023 electronic Behavior Monitoring Record (eBMR) for each shift in the month of October 2023 revealed blanks on the record where the nurses did not sign that behavior monitoring…

    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 · E2023-11-06 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
    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

    Complaints NJ00167370; NJ00163024, NJ00157820; NJ00161456, NJ00166876. Based on interviews of facility staff, residents, and a resident representative (Residents #72, 63, 31, 61, 41) and review of pertinent facility documentation, it was determined the facility failed to maintain the required minimum direct care staff-to-resident ratios as mandated by the State of New Jersey. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: Reference: NJ State requirement, CHAPTER 112. An Act concerning staffing requirements for nursing homes and supplementing Title 30 of the Revised Statutes. Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: C.30:13-18 Minimum staffing requirements for nursing homes effective 2/1/21. 1. a. Notwithstanding any other staffing requirements as may be established by law, every nursing home as defined in section 2 of P.L.1976, c.120 (C.30:13-2) or licensed pursuant to P.L.1971, c.136 (C.26:2H-1 et seq.) shall maintain the following minimum direct care staff -to-resident ratios: (1) one certified nurse aide to every eight residents for…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-06 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    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 complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA) Minimum Data Assessment (MDS) for 1 of 29 (Resident # 57) residents reviewed. This deficient practice was evidenced as follows: According to the Resident Assessment Instrument Manual Version 3.0 of Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) guidelines, updated October 2019, a SCSA MDS is required within 14 days after the facility determines or should have determined that there has been a significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition, a SCSA/MDS must be completed. (For purpose of this section, a significant change is a decline or improvement in the resident's status that will not normally resolve itself without further intervention by staff or by implementing standard disease-related interventions, that has an impact on more than one area of the resident's health status and requires interdisciplinary review or revision of the 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-06 · tag F0640 — isolated
    Encode 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed a) to complete a Tracking Record (Discharge) Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care of all residents, and b) electronically transmit an MDS, for 2 of 29 residents (Residents #23 and #68) reviewed for resident assessments. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 10/30/23 at 01:11 PM, the surveyor completed record review of Resident #23 specific to MDS assessment. The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was discharged to home with Hospice Care on 8/2/23. The discharge MDS was not completed for 8/2/23. The discharge MDS was 75 days overdue. On 10/31/23 at 11:10 AM, the surveyor interviewed the facility MDS Coordinator who had been working in facility since 2018. She stated she transmits weekly and just transmitted last week. On 11/02/23 at 12:51 PM, the surveyor reviewed the facility Policy and Procedure given by the Regional MDS. The policy…

    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 · D2023-11-06 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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 observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for the administration of oxygen in accordance with professional standards of practice and according to facility policy. This deficient practice was observed for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #6) reviewed for respiratory care. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 10/27/2023 at 12:08 PM, the surveyor observed Resident #6 sitting in the wheelchair. The resident received Oxygen (O2) at two liters per minute by way of a nasal cannula attached to an oxygen concentrator (a free-standing device used to deliver oxygen). The surveyor reviewed the hybrid medical record: The admission Record indicated that the resident had medical diagnoses that included but were not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The 09/19/2023 admission Minimum Data Set (AMDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care, did not indicate oxygen was used or the presence of shortness of breath. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9…

    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 · D2023-11-06 · 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, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to properly label, store, and dispose of medications in 4 of 6 medication carts and 1 of 3 medication room refrigerators inspected. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On [DATE] at 10:20 AM, the surveyor inspected the first floor medication cart #1 in the presence of a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN#1). The surveyor observed an opened bottle of Xatmep (Methotrexate) oral solution (treats inflammatory conditions such as arthritis) with an opened date of [DATE] and was expired. The surveyor interviewed LPN#1 who stated that the medication belongs to a resident who was discharged from the facility. LPN#1 further stated that all medications belonging to a discharged resident should have been removed from the medication cart. On [DATE] at 10:30 AM, the surveyor inspected the first floor medication room refrigerator in the presence of LPN#1. The surveyor observed an opened and undated bottle 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-01-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide 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, record review, and review of other pertinent facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to: a.) implement mitigation strategies in accordance with the Center for Disease Control guidance to prevent the transmission of COVID-19; b.) ensure infection control practices were adhered during wound care as previously cited during last standard survey; and c.) ensure a clean tissue was used for optical drops to prevent cross contamination. These deficient practices were identified for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #86 and #154) newly admitted unvaccinated residents; 1 of 1 resident (Resident #354) during wound care; and 1 of 4 residents (Resident #203) during medication pass and evidenced by the following: 1. Reference: Center for Disease Control (CDC) Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Spread in Nursing Homes updated 9/10/21: All unvaccinated residents who are new admissions and readmissions should be placed on a 14-day quarantine, even if they have a negative test upon admission .Guidance for…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-01-05 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined that the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for a restorative nursing program and accurately document the continuation of the restorative nursing program services in accordance with professional standards of nursing practice. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for restorative nursing services (Resident #49). 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 casefinding, 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. Nursing Board. The Nurse Practice…

    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 · D2022-01-05 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that all medications were administered without error of 5% or more. During the medication pass on 12/16/21 and 12/20/21, the surveyor observed three nurses passing medications to four residents with 27 opportunities for error. There were two errors which calculated to a medication administration error rate of 7.41%. This deficient practice was identified for 2 of 3 nurses for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #64 and #33) and was evidenced by the following: 1. On 12/16/21 at 8:24 AM, the surveyor conducted a medication pass observation in the presence of a second surveyor. The surveyor observed the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #1) crush eight (8) medications including one 200 milligram (mg) tablet of carbamazepine ER (extended release), a medication used to treat bipolar disorder for Resident #64. LPN #1 confirmed that she was ready to administer the crushed medications to Resident #64. (Error 1) On 12/16/2021 at 8:35 AM, the surveyor asked LPN #1 to review the electronic Medication…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$25,753 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $25,753 — penalty dated 2023-11-06

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 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.1+0.9 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.3-1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 84 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Complete Care At Chestnut Hill LLCPassaic, NJ 1 of 5Complete Care At HagerstownHagerstown, MD 1 of 5Complete Care At Harston Hall LLCFlourtown, PA 1 of 5Complete Care At Kimberly Hall NorthWindsor, CT 1 of 5Complete Care At Laplata LLCLaplata, MD 1 of 5Complete Care At Milford Manor LLCWest Milford, NJ 1 of 5Complete Care At Wayne Hills Rehab & Resp CenterWayne, NJ 1 of 5Complete Care at Care AgeBrookfield, WI 1 of 5Complete Care at KensingtonWaukesha, WI 1 of 5Complete Care at Maple Grove LLCMadison, WI 1 of 5Complete Care at Margate ParkChicago, IL 1 of 5Complete Care at the BoulevardChicago, IL 2 of 5Complete Care At Brakeley ParkPhillipsburg, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care At Fox HillVernon, CT 2 of 5Complete Care At Harborage LLCNorth Bergen, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care At Harrington CourtColchester, CT 2 of 5Complete Care At HyattsvilleHyattsville, MD 2 of 5Complete Care At Inglemoor, LLCEnglewood, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care At Monmouth, LLCLong Branch, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care At Ocean Grove LLCOcean Grove, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care At Prospect Heights LLCHackensack, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care At Regent LLCHackensack, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care at Christian Home LLCWaupun, WI 2 of 5Complete Care at Grande PrairiePleasant Prairie, WI 2 of 5Complete Care at Heritage LLCDundalk, MD 2 of 5Complete Care at Linwood, LLCLinwood, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care at Nazareth LLCStoughton, WI 2 of 5Complete Care at Voorhees, LLCVoorhees, NJ 2 of 5Complete Care at Wall LLCWall, NJ 3 of 5Complete Care At Fair Lawn EdgePaterson, NJ 3 of 5Complete Care At Holiday CityToms River, NJ 3 of 5Complete Care At Lehigh LLCMacungie, PA 3 of 5Complete Care At Oak Ridge LLCCharleston, WV 3 of 5Complete Care At Orange ParkEast Orange, NJ 3 of 5Complete Care At Phillipsburg, LLCPhillipsburg, NJ 3 of 5Complete Care At Severna Park LLCSeverna Park, MD 3 of 5Complete Care At Shrewsbury LLCShrewsbury, NJ 3 of 5Complete Care At Silver Lake LLCDover, DE 3 of 5Complete Care At SpringbrookSilver Spring, MD 3 of 5Complete Care at Brick LLCBrick, NJ

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CLARK HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 04/01/2023
EEF CAPITAL LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 04/01/2023
PC CLARK HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 04/01/2023
SCHLAFF, BENNYIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 04/01/2023
SCHLAFF, NACHUMIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 04/01/2023
STEIN, SHALOMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2023
GREWAL, BALJINDERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023
LEVOVITZ, YITZCHOKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2023
MERCADO, WANDAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2023
MORANDI, MICHELEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023
VESHNEFSKY, MOSHEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/17/2023
PC CLARK PROPERTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023
COMEO, HECTORIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$13.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-0.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.2M
Related-party expense16% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 59%Medicare 18%Other / private 23%

This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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

$444per resident / day
operating cost
$13,488per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$441per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in New Jersey
$12,775/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$14,448/mo
Nursing home (private)
$8,710/mo
Assisted living

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 315341. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-15, 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.

What to do next