Cranbury 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.

56.0% 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 164 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% 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 64 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 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 154 beds and averages 96.8 residents a day — about 63% occupied, or roughly 57 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.21 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.90 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 2.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.38 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.54 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

20 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2026-05-28 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interviews, review of medical records, and review of other pertinent facility documents on 05/28/2026, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an environment free from the use of physical restraint for Resident #2.This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for restraint.During the survey, a tour was conducted by the surveyor, there was no restrictive device noted for any resident.On 05/23/2026, during the 7:00 AM-3:00 PM shift, the Registered Nurse (RN#1) who was assigned to Resident #2 stated the resident was experiencing respiratory distress. RN#1 administered a respiratory treatment by nebulizer mask. RN#1 stated during the treatment Resident #2 became combative and pulled off the mask from their face. RN#1 stated she then used a pillowcase, wrapped it around Resident #2's left hand and tied it to their side rail to ensure Resident #2 received their respiratory treatment. At approximately 10:20AM, Resident #2 was found by their Hospice Nurse with a restraint to left hand. The hospice nurse called 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the code status for a resident (Resident # 61) was accurately documented in the electronic medical record (EMR) that correctly identified their wishes in the event of a medical emergency. This deficient practice was identified for 1 out of 37 residents (Resident # 61). Resident # 61 wished to be a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR; do not perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) if a person's heart stops or they cease breathing). A review of the resident's EMR revealed that Resident # 61's code status was documented as DNR/Full Code (all resuscitation procedures will be provided when a person stops breathing or their heart stops beating). An interview with staff on [DATE], revealed that during an emergency response, staff would initiate CPR while another staff member called the resident's family to verify their wishes. The facility's failure to ensure Resident # 61's code status was correct during an…

  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 · Fcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure areas in the kitchen remained sanitary including sanitation buckets remaining at the correct Parts Per Million (PPM) level, the outside of the ice machine was cleaned, dry storage was properly labeled and dated, broken equipment was not used and covers for the steam table were clean when in use. This failure had the potential to affect the spread of food borne illness for 100 of 101 total sampled residents. Findings include:During the initial kitchen tour on 12/01/25 at 10:30 AM with the Dietary Manager (DM), the following observations were made: 1. The sanitary bucket used for wiping cloths, located on the shelf near the floor, was tested and revealed 0 PPM of sanitizer. 2. The lower front of the ice machine was covered in splattered food and water stains. 3. Four ingredient bins, located in the dry storage room, were not labeled or dated. There was one bin with flour, one with breadcrumbs, one with sugar and one with rice. 4. Two plastic containers that held cups and small desert bowls with…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-04 · 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 Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that four residents (R70, R11, R77, and R20) out of 37 residents sampled had a Minimum Data Set (MDS) that accurately reflected their Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II status. This had the potential to affect all residents who qualified for a PASRR Level II. Findings include:1.Review of R70's admission Record located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed a re-admission to the facility on [DATE]. Review of R70's annual MDS under the MDS tab of the EMR, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/29/25, revealed no indication of a Mental Illness or Level II services. Review of R70's PASARR I located under the Resident Documents tab in the EMR dated 04/03/18 revealed the resident was referred for a level II. During an interview on 12/04/25 at 9:17 AM the Minimum Data Set (MDSC) nurse stated that all the MDS assessments in section A of the Level II PASARR Conditions were done incorrectly per…

  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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  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 interview, record review, review of facility reported incident (FRI), and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident (R) 46) of four residents reviewed for abuse out of a total sample of 37 residents was free from abuse. This had the potential for an injury to the resident. Findings include:1.Review of R85's admission Record, located in the profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) indicated the resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with severe dementia with agitation. An attempt was made to interview R85 however he did not respond to questions. 2. Review of R46's admission Record, located in the profile tab of the EMR indicated that R46 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with bipolar and adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. Review of R46's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 11/24/25 revealed that R46 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, indicating she…

  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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to identify targeted behaviors, conduct behavior tracking and monitor the side effects of antipsychotic medications for two of five sampled residents (Resident (R) 80 and R6) reviewed for unnecessary medications out of a total sample of 37 residents. These failures placed the residents at risk for not obtaining the intended therapeutic goal of the antipsychotic medication and the potential for serious adverse effects from the antipsychotic medications.Findings include: 1.Review of R80's undated Resident Face Sheet, found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, indicated the resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including schizophrenia. Review of R80's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/09/25 and located in the EMR indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15, which indicated R5 was cognitively intact. 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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse within two hours for two of three residents (Resident (R) 80 and R46) reviewed for abuse out of a total of 37 residents. his had the potential for continued abuse of the residents.Findings include:1. Review of R80's undated Resident Face Sheet, found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, indicated the resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including schizophrenia. 2. Review of R46's Face Sheet located in the EMR under the Profile tab revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder and bipolar disorder. Review of the Nurse's Note dated 08/23/25 and located under Progress Notes tab in the EMR revealed During the 3-11 shift, R80 had reportedly threatened R46 in stating he was going to blow his head off, if he doesn't give him a cigarette while cursing and causing a disturbance in the hallway.…

  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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  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 Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of verbal and physical abuse for two residents (Resident (R) 46 and R85) out of five residents reviewed for abuse out of a total sample of 37 residents. This had the potential for continued abuse of the residents.Findings include:1. Review of R80's undated Resident Face Sheet found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, indicated the resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Review of R46's Face Sheet located in the EMR under the Profile tab revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder and bipolar disorder. Review of the Nurse's Note dated 08/23/25 and located under Progress Notes in the EMR revealed During the 3-11 shift, R80 had reportedly threatened R46, stating he was going to blow his head off, if he doesn't give him a cigarette while cursing and causing a disturbance in…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 5) of 37 residents reviewed was invited to their care plan conference. The facility further failed to hold a care plan conference for R119. This had to potential to cause the residents to be not informed regarding their care. Findings include:1.Review of R5's Face Sheet located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed an admission date of 08/18/23 with medical diagnosis of chronic kidney disease.Review of R5's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the EMR under the MDS tab with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/07/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating R5 was cognitively intact. Review of the Care Conference Notification Letter dated 06/04/25 located in the EMR under the Documents tab revealed, Care plan conference for (R5) on Thursday June 12th at 1:00 PM. The letter was addressed to R5's family members. There was…

  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 · E2024-06-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  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

  Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment when staff delivered the lunch meal on a tray from the cart to the table and did not remove the food from the tray in the dining room for 16 of 55 residents that resided on Unit C (Residents (R) 16, R23, R39, R47, R49, R54, R56, R69, R70, R75, R80, R86, R90, R110, R113 and R123. This failure had the potential to result in an institutional dining experience. Findings include: During an observation on 06/11/24 at 12:01 PM, two staff members delivered the lunch meal trays and sat them on the tables in front of R16, R23, R39, R47, R49, R54, R56, R69, R70, R75, R80, R86, R90, R110, R113 and R123. Continued observation revealed nursing staff in the dining room did not remove the food from the tray and place it on the table after the trays were delivered. During an interview on 06/11/24 at 12:13 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 5 verified she had worked at the facility since 2014 and the food was not removed from the tray after it was placed on the table in the dining…

  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 · Ecited before2024-06-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based upon observation, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to allow cooking vessels to completely air dry before being placed for storage in one of one kitchen. This failure has the potential to create an environment that would enable bacteria growth between the vessels which could cause illness among 127 of 128 residents. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 06/11/24 at 10:10 AM with the Chef Manager (CM), buffet pans and other pans were stacked to be stored without reaching complete dryness. The CM was shown the multiple stacked pans, and the CM stated all the washed items should have been completely dried before stacking and storing. The CM then proceeded to take the stacks of wet items to the dishwasher room. During an observation and interview on 06/12/24 at 2:34 PM, with the CM and Food Services Director (FSD), buffet pans and other pans were stacked to be stored without reaching complete dryness. The CM and FSD were shown the multiple stacks, and the CM stated all the washed items should have been completely dried before stacking 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain the residents' dignity when staff stood while assisting residents to eat in the dining room for one of 17 residents (Resident (R) 16) reviewed for meal assistance of 34 sampled residents. This failure had the potential to result in an undignified dining experience. Findings include: Review of R16's admission Record located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include unspecified dementia with agitation and dysphagia. Review of R16's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/29/24 located in R16's EMR under the MDS tab, revealed R16 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of two out of 15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The MDS revealed R16 required a mechanically altered diet. During an observation on 06/11/24 at 12:02 PM, the meal…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$24,746 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $14,385 — penalty dated 2026-05-28
• $10,361 — penalty dated 2025-12-04

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 GENESIS HEALTHCARE — 184 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 19 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 75% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $3.2M 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