Optima Care Fountains
595 County Avenue, Secaucus, NJ 07094 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 334 certified beds · (201) 863-8866 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Oct 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $51,483 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-30)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- about 22% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 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 held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.2% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.0% | 4.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.1% | 0.8% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.2% | 12.1% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.5% | 2.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.5% | 8.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.4% | 18.8% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.7% | 97.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 9.5% | 5.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 6.7% | 15.6% | 21.2% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.3% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 35.4% | 80.1% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.8% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.1% | 8.1% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.61 | 2.07 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.84 | 1.11 | 1.80 | better |
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.
47.5% 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 125 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 64.6% 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 130 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 20% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 39% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 47.5%CMS range 39.9–60.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 7.3–13.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 64.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 57.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 59.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 9.1%CMS range 6.5–12.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.27 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 334 beds and averages 283.4 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 51 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.74 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.60 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.95 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.62 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
43 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-01-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint #: NJ00181722, NJ00181697 Based on observation, interview, record review and review of other pertinent facility documents on 1/16/2025, 1/17/2025 and 1/22/2025, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure a safe environment for a cognitively impaired, exit seeking resident. The facility failed to ensure exit doors were secured to prevent the resident's exit from the unit. This resulted in Resident #2 eloping from the nursing unit on 12/13/2024. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for elopement. The facility failed to ensure a safe environment for Resident #2, posed a serious and immediate risk to the health, safety and wellbeing of the resident. The findings were as follows: The New Jersey Department of Health received a Facility Reportable Event (FRE) dated 12/19/24 at 10:51a.m. According to the FRE, on 12/13/24, at approximately 11:15 p.m., a nurse conducting rounds noticed that Resident #2 was not in the room.…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-10-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of one (1) residents (Resident #157) reviewed for pain management received pain management related to pressure ulcer treatments. Resident #157 exhibited signs and symptoms of pain during their dressing change and staff failed to stop the treatment. The resident was not pre-medicated for pain which caused Resident #157 to suffer unnecessary pain. Findings Include: Review of Resident #157's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed Resident #157 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included but not limited to stroke; impaired thought process, and anxiety. Review of Resident #157's Care Plan, located under the Care Plan tab of the EMR and dated 06/29/23, revealed the resident had potential for pain related to their disease process. Interventions included administering pain medications as ordered, anticipating the need for pain relief, responding immediately to any complaint of pain, and notifying the physician if interventions…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-02-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review and policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the kitchen environment and equipment in a sanitary manner to prevent contamination from foreign substances and potential for the development a food borne illness. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 2/12/26 at 10:30 AM, in the presence of the Food Services Director (FSD) and the Kitchen Supervisor (KS), the surveyor observed the following: In the south kitchen food preparation area, the surveyor observed that 1 of 2 of the fire suppression poles and sprinkler heads were soiled with a grease-like substance and dust like particles. In the food preparation area, the surveyor observed 3 of 10 burners on the cook top, which were soiled with a thick black grease-like substance, which was easily lifted with the tip of the surveyor's pen.In the food preparation, the surveyor observed the ice machine's internal plastic barrier, which was soiled with black and brown colored particles. The KS stated that the barrier was soiled and should have been…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure call lights were within residents' reach and easily accessible for 4 of 33 residents reviewed (#15, #19, #57 and #234) and was evidenced by the following.This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1.On 2/12/26 at 10:29 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #57, in a bed that was low to the floor and against the wall. The call light was inaccessible to the resident as it extended between the wall and the bed, resting on the floor under the bed. On 2/12/26 at 12:10 PM, the surveyor returned to the resident's room. The call bell remained inaccessible in the same location as the previous observation. The surveyor confirmed the call light's placement with the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1. She stated the call light should be accessible to the resident. On 2/12/26 at 12:20 PM, the surveyor spoke with the Unit 11 Registered Nurse Unit Manager. The nurse confirmed the call light should be accessible…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and review of facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents who maintained a Personal Needs Account (PNA) received a written notification that their account approached the limit that could jeopardize a resident's eligibility for Medicaid. This deficient practice was identified for 7 of 212 residents (Resident #4, #62, # 97, #183, #214, # 274, and #280) who maintained a PNA at the facility and was evidenced by: On 2/12/2026 at 11:08 AM, during entrance conference with the License Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA), the surveyor requested a list of the PNA balances.A review of the Fund Balances Report (FBR) from 2/11/2026 revealed a list of 212 active resident names with a total balance of $139,435.20. There were seven (7) residents listed with PNA funds that range from $1990.48 to $7956.76. On 2/18/2026 at 10:37 AM, the surveyor interviewed the Business Office manager (BOM), who stated [name redacted-the business management office (BMO)] manages resident's PNA balances. She stated the BMO would send her an email informing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-19 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 provide resident confidentiality for 2 residents (#57, #225) of 33 reviewed for confidentiality and privacy and was evidenced by the following.1.On 2/12/26 at 10:16 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #57 in a low bed with eyes closed. The surveyor observed a handwritten sign taped to the front of the resident's clothes closet. The sign included care instructions for staff.A review of the electronic medical record revealed the following information.A review of the 11/19/25 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment tool indicated the resident had no cognitive deficits as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. The resident had diagnoses including but not limited to dementia with behavioral disturbance and mood disorder.On 2/18/2026 at 10:16 AM, the surveyor interviewed the Unit 11 Registered Nurse Unit Manager. She was not aware of the signage and stated she would place the sign inside the resident's closet. 2. On 2/12/26 at 11:26 AM, the surveyor observed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and review of facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a clean/homelike and sanitary environment for the residents. This deficient practice was identified on 4 of 7 nursing units and was evidenced by the following:1. On 2/12/2026 beginning at 10:00 AM, the surveyor toured the first and second floors of Unit 11. The following environmental concerns were observed: -The first-floor day room/dining room had 2 chairs with torn vinyl on the seats. The wall-mounted air-conditioning unit had a broken face panel exposing the underlying coils. -The first-floor shower room's baseboard heating element was rusted and had chipped paint. The windowsill was damaged, and the window was not closed completely with a towel placed between the sill and the bottom of the window. On the sink top were open bottles of body wash, shampoo, and shaving cream, and an open brick pack of Glucerna nutritional drink. In the sink drain was a container of deodorant. The shower…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop 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, review of the facility's policy, and other pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to implement their abuse policy to complete background checks for 3 out 97 employees (Employee #1, #2, #3). This deficient was identified for newly hired employees reviewed since last survey from 10/17/2024 and was evidenced as follows:A review of the employee personnel files revealed the following:For Employee #1, a dietary staff (cook) with a start date of 6/16/25, there was no evidence of a background check prior to the start of employment.For Employee #2, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) with a start date of 4/1/25, there was no evidence of a background check prior to the start of employment. For Employee #3, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) with a start date of 4/23/25, there was no evidence of a background check prior to the start of employment. On 2/19/26 at 11:16 AM, the surveyor interviewed the Business Office Manager, who stated that background checks should be completed prior to the employees' hire. She further stated that it would…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to complete and transmit a Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care) in accordance with federal guidelines. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #25) during the review of resident assessment. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: The MDS is a comprehensive tool, a federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents that must be completed and transmitted to the Quality Measure System. The facility must electronically transmit the MDS within 14 days of completing the assessment. After the MDS is transmitted, a quality measure will be transmitted to enable a facility to monitor the residents' decline or progress. On 2/18/26 at 10:57 AM, the surveyor provided the MDS Coordinator/Registered Nurse (MDSC/RN#1) with Resident #25 who had completed a quarterly MDS (Q/MDS) assessment. The surveyor also requested a copy of the resident's final validation report (generated after every MDS transmission)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 interviews and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care), in accordance with federal guidelines, for 1 (one) of 36 residents (Resident #15), who were reviewed for accuracy for MDS coding. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 2/12/26 at 11:00 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #15 asleep in bed. On 2/13/26 at 11:28 AM, the surveyor reviewed the hybrid medical record (paper and electronic) of Resident #15, which revealed the following: A review of the admission Record (AR, an admission summary) reflected that Resident #15 was admitted with diagnoses that included but were not limited to; an unspecified dementia (loss of memory), unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety (excessive worry). A review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (SC/MDS) dated [DATE], indicated that the facility assessed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADL) were provided care consistent with their needs and preferences for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #234 and #252) reviewed for ADL care.This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 2/12/26 at 11:11 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #252 lying in their bed. Resident #252 was alert, verbally responsive, and Spanish speaking. The surveyor observed the resident's fingernails on both hands were long. The surveyor in Spanish asked the resident about their nail care. Resident #252 stated that their nails had not been trimmed, and they liked their nails kept short. On 2/12/26 at 2:28 PM, the surveyor reviewed the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) of Resident #252. The admission Record (a summary of important information about a resident) revealed Resident #252 had a diagnosis which included but was not limited to; hemiplegia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services in accordance with professional standards to ensure appropriate dispensing and administration of a medication for 1 of 13 residents observed during medication administration. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following:Reference: New Jersey Statutes Annotated, Title 45. Chapter 11. Nursing Board. The Nurse Practice Act for the State of New Jersey states: The practice of nursing as a registered professional nurse is defined as diagnosing and treating human responses to actual and potential physical and emotional health problems, through such services as case finding, health teaching, health counseling, and provision of care supportive to or restorative of life and wellbeing, and executing medical regimens as prescribed by a licensed or otherwise legally authorized physician or dentist.On 2/17/26 at 9:49 AM, the surveyor observed a Registered Nurse (RN) prepare medications to be administered to Resident #123. The medications removed from 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.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and review of pertinent facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the device used to identify call device notifications were functioning properly for 1 of 7 units.This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On [DATE] at 11:00 AM, the surveyor observed the call light was on outside the resident's room [ROOM NUMBER], but there was no audible sound. The surveyor observed unit 12's call light system machine in unit 12's nursing station had no audible sounds, and no button lights were on. On the same day, the surveyor observed another call light was on outside of another room in unit 12, but there was still no audible sound, and no lights were on in the nurses' station call light system machine. On [DATE] at 11:18 AM, the surveyor interviewed the Licensed Practical Nurse/Unit Manager (LPN/UM), who stated that the call light and sound were off in the nurses' station, but she had informed the maintenance department about the call light…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0924 — isolatedPut firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure handrails were secure and intact on 2 of 7 resident units. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following:1. On 2/13/2026 at 10:19 AM, the surveyor toured unit 8, 2nd floor and observed the following: -a handrail located across from emergency exit door, near the pay phone, next to room [ROOM NUMBER], was coming loose away from the wall. On 2/13/2026 10:24 AM, the surveyor interviewed the Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) on the unit, who stated if something was broken, she would report it to the nurse, who would then notify maintenance. She stated she was unaware of the loose handrail. On 2/13/2026 at 10:32 AM, the surveyor interviewed the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1, for unit 8. LPN #1 stated if something was broken, he would call maintenance and enter it into the maintenance logbook (MLB). LPN #1 provided the surveyor with the MLB. A review of the MLB from October to present did…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY C#NJ183884Based on interviews, medical record review and pertinent facility documents reviewed on 7/18/2025 and 7/21/2025, it was determined that facility staff failed develop and implement an oxygen Care Plan (CP) with appropriate interventions for a resident (Resident #2) receiving oxygen. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for CP and was evidenced by the following: Review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) was as follows:According to the admission Record (AR), Resident #2 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included but were not limited to Parkinson's, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, and Atrial Flutter.A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care, dated 12/18/2024, Resident #2 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5/15, which indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired.A review of Resident #2's Order Summary Report (OSR), revealed an order 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-22 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Complaint #NJ183644Based on interviews, medical record review and pertinent facility documents reviewed on 7/18/2025 and 7/21/2025, it was determined that facility staff facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate medical record (MR) for 1 (Resident # 3) of 11 sampled residents. This deficient practice is evident by the following:According to the facility admission Record (AR), Resident #3 was admitted to the facility with the following diagnoses which included but not limited to: Atrial Fibrillation, Anogenital Warts, Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, and Nontraumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage.A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care, dated 3/17/2025, Resident #3 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15, which indicated that the resident's cognitive function was intact.A review of Resident #3's Care Plan (CP), initiated 11/6/2024, included a focus, Resident #3 has Cerebral Vascular Accident (Stroke) r/t Hemorrhage. Interventions included but were not limited to, Monitor/document residents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint #: NJ00182050 Based on interviews, review of medical records, and other pertinent facility documentation on 1/16/2025 and 1/17/2025, it was determined that the facility failed to: a.) administer medications as prescribed within the appropriate medication administration timeframe and b.) notify the physician when a medication was not available for administration. The facility also failed to follow its policy titled Medication Administration Policy. This deficient practice was identified for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration documentation. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. According to the admission Record (AR), Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: Parkinson's Disease, Unspecified Dementia, and Unspecified Depression. A review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool dated 10/12/2024, revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 14 out of 15, which indicated the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint #: NJ00182050 Based on interviews, medical record review, and review of other pertinent facility documents on 1/16/2025 and 1/17/2025 it was determined that the facility staff failed to consistently document in the Documentation Survey Report (DSR) the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) status and care provided to the residents. This deficient practice was identified for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for ADL documentation. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. According to the admission Record (AR), Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: Parkinson's Disease, Unspecified Dementia, and Unspecified Depression. A review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool dated 10/12/2024, revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 14 out of 15, which indicated the resident's cognition was intact. The MDS further revealed that the resident was independent with toileting hygiene and dressing but requires…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain proper food holding temperatures. This had the potential to affect 273 of 273 residents who ate food from the kitchen. This failure had the potential to cause food borne illness in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy and procedure for Holding Hot Food Prior to Service, last revised 04/20/2022, revealed, . It is the policy of this facility to hold hot food at acceptable temperature range prior to service . Upon removal from the oven or stove, cooked meats are to be kept at an internal temperature of 140 degrees or higher in a steamtable, or suitable device . During the noon meal preparation on 10/16/24 at 11:30 AM., food for the meal was removed from the oven, temperatures were obtained, and the food was placed on the steam table. The food temperatures when removed from the oven were: Seasoned chicken thighs- 160 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Italian green beans - 200 degrees F. Carrots - 170 degrees F. The meal trays were prepared and then loaded onto…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-17 · tag F0847 — widespreadInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform three of three residents and/or their responsible parties (Resident (R) 380, R112, and R265) reviewed for arbitration agreements out of a total sample of 45 of their right to rescind the arbitration agreement within 30 calendar days and their right to not be required to enter into a binding arbitration agreement as a condition of admission. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated admission Agreement revealed in section 9. Miscellaneous Category G, Disputes, Any controversy, dispute or disagreement arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the breach thereof, or the subject matter thereof including Facility's obligation thereof shall be settled by binding arbitration, which shall be conducted in Jersey City, New Jersey in accordance with the American Health Lawyers Association Alternative Dispute Resolution Service Rules of Procedure for Arbitration, and which to the extent of the subject matter of the arbitration shall be binding not only on all the parties to this Agreement, but on any other…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-17 · tag F0848 — widespreadProvide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure their arbitration agreement informed three of three residents and/or their responsible parties (Resident (R) 380, R112, and R265) reviewed for arbitration agreements out of a total sample of 45 of their right to the selection of a neutral arbitrator agreed upon by both parties. The agreement also failed to inform the residents and/or their representatives of their right to select a venue for arbitration that was convenient to both parties. Findings include: Review of a copy of the facility's undated admission Agreement revealed in section 9. Miscellaneous Category G, Disputes, Any controversy, dispute or disagreement arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the breach thereof, or the subject matter thereof including Facility's obligation thereof shall be settled by binding arbitration, which shall be conducted in Jersey City, New Jersey in accordance with the American Health Lawyers Association Alternative Dispute Resolution Service Rules of Procedure for Arbitration, and which to the extent of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, observation, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide information on how to file an anonymous grievance for seven of seven residents (Residents (R) 23, R44, R117, R140, R152, R177, and R200) reviewed for the grievance process out of a total sample of 45. The failure had the potential to affect residents' ability to safely report concerns without fear of retaliation. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident and Family Grievances, revised 10/16/24, revealed, . It is the policy of this facility to support each resident's and family member's right to voice grievances without discrimination, reprisal or fear of discrimination or reprisal . A grievance may be filed anonymously. Anonymous grievance may be filed using the Compliance Hotline and/or complaint/grievance boxes located throughout the facility . During the initial tour of the facility, a poster recording the number for the facility's Compliance Hotline was observed posted near the administrative office. No complaint/grievance boxes were observed in the facility.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, review of facility reported incidents (FRI), and review of facility policy, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse by other residents for five (Resident (R) 262, R426, R424, R66, and R128) of eight residents reviewed for abuse out of a total sample of 45 residents. R262 scratched R76 on the face with a broken comb; R426 pulled R424's hair; and R140 struck R142, R66, and R128 with his hand. The facility's failure to protect residents from abuse placed resident at continued risk of harm. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, reviewed 07/2024, indicated, It is the policy of this facility to provide protection for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property. 1. a. Review of R262's admission Record, located under the Profile…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely 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 interview, record review, review of facility reported incidents (FRI), and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure allegations of resident-to-resident abuse involving four of eight residents (Resident (R) 262, R76, R426, and R424) reviewed for abuse out of a total sample of 45 were reported to the state agency (SA) within two hours of knowledge of the alleged incidents. This failure had the possibility of negatively impacting all 277 residents currently residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, reviewed 07/2024, indicated, . Reporting/Response: A. The facility will have written procedures that include: 1. Reporting of all alleged violations to the Administrator, state agency (SA), adult protective services (APS) and to all other required agencies (e.g., law enforcement when applicable) within specified timeframes: a. Immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond 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 interview, record review, review of facility reported incidents (FRI), and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure allegations of resident-to-resident abuse involving four of eight residents (Resident (R) 262, R76, R426, and R424) reviewed for abuse out of a total sample of 45 were thoroughly investigated. The failure to thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse had the potential to cause other residents to be at risk of abuse. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, reviewed 07/2024, indicated, . Investigation of alleged abuse, neglect and exploitation: A. An immediate investigation is warranted when suspicion of abuse, neglect or exploitation, or reports of abuse, neglect or exploitation occur. B. Written procedures for investigations include: . 4. Identifying and interviewing all involved persons, including the alleged victim, alleged perpetrator, witnesses, and others who might have knowledge of the allegations . 6. Providing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written information regarding the facility's bed-hold policy for six of nine residents (Resident (R) 75, R111, R127, R209, R90, and R186) reviewed for hospitalization out of a total sample of 45. The failure had the potential to cause confusion for residents planning on returning to the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, readmission To Facility, revised 07/2023, indicated, It is the policy of this facility to protect the resident's rights to readmission by initiating a bed-hold and permitting each resident to return to the facility after they are hospitalized or placed on therapeutic leave, regardless of payment source . Procedure: 1. The facility will initiate a bed-hold and permit residents to return to the facility and resume residence after they are hospitalized or placed on therapeutic leave . 4. Residents who seek to return to the facility within the bed-hold period in the state plan are allowed to return…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 test tray sample, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, flavorful and at proper temperature for nine of nine residents (Resident (R) 111, R162, R117, R23, R44, R140, R152, R177, and R200) reviewed for food palatability. This failure had the potential for residents who disliked a meal to experience nutritional problems or dissatisfaction with their meals. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy and procedure for Holding Hot Food Prior to Service, last revised 04/20/2022, revealed, . It is the policy of this facility to hold hot food at acceptable temperature range prior to service . Upon removal from the oven or stove, cooked meats are to be kept at an internal temperature of 140 degrees or higher in a steamtable, or suitable device . 1. Review of R111's admission Record, located under the Profile tab in the EMR, indicated that R111 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dysphagia. Review of R111's quarterly…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — patternHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and observations, the facility failed to maintain documentation and demonstrated evidence of its' ongoing Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program. This failure had the potential to negatively affect 277 of 277 residents who resided at the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, QAPI Plan Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement, updated 04/01/24, indicated, . Optima Care Fountains maintains a coordinated quality assessment and assurance program which integrates the review activities of all nursing home programs and services to enhance the quality of life and resident care and treatment. The purpose of the QAPI at Optima Care Fountains is to take a proactive approach to continually improving the way we care for and engage with our residents, caregivers, and other partners. To do this we study, plan, analyze, and validate specific areas of improvement for positive resident care outcomes. This will allow us to realize our Vision and carry out our Mission Statement. The QAPI will meet monthly.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — patternSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to obtain feedback, use data, and take action to conduct systematic investigations and analyses of underlying causes or contributing factors of problems affecting facility-wide processes. Specifically, the facility failed to use feedback and data from resident council meetings to address food palatability concerns. This failure had the potential to affect the nutritional status of 273 of 273 residents who ate food from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, QAPI Plan Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement, updated 04/01/24, indicated, Optima Care Fountains maintains a coordinated quality assessment and assurance program which integrates the review activities of all nursing home programs and services to enhance the quality of life and resident care and treatment. The purpose of the QAPI at Optima Care Fountains is to take a proactive approach to continually improving the way we care for and engage with our residents, caregivers, and other partners. To do this we study, plan, analyze,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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
Based on observation, interview, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 45 (Resident (R) 26) sampled residents observed while dining were treated with dignity. Specifically, staff failed to sit while feeding R265. This failure had the potential to cause residents to feel undignified. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity, revised 07/2023, revealed, . It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity as well as care for each resident in a manner and in an environment, that maintains or enhances resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality. All staff members are involved in providing care to residents to promote and maintain resident dignity and respect resident rights . Review of R265's admission Record, found in the electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab, showed a facility admission date of 08/14/24 with diagnoses that included acute stroke with right-sided weakness and aphasia. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure personal privacy during care for two of 47 (Resident (R) 75 and R110) residents observed. This had the potential to cause embarrassment or shame for the residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Privacy and Confidentiality, dated 07/2023, revealed, . During the delivery of personal care and services, staff must remove residents from public view, pull privacy curtains or close doors, and provide clothing or draping to prevent exposure of body parts . 1. Review of R75's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed R75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction due to embolism, chronic congestive heart failure, and Alzheimer's dementia. Review of R75's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/26/24, revealed R75 had a Brief Interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of one public bathrooms (Unit 12 public bathroom) observed for concerns was free of insects and was maintained in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to cause the spread of infection by disease-causing organisms. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Environment, dated 09/2022, revealed, . Housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior . During an interview on10/16/24 at 12:55 PM, the Director of Housekeeping (HKSP) stated the facility's pest management company came every two weeks and sprayed to prevent insects for the entire campus. HKSP stated this treatment would take two days to complete, and if there were any issues with pests, it would be documented at each nurses' station which areas might require attention. Review of the facility's pest control sheets for September 2024 revealed no documentation of roaches on Unit 12. During a confidential interview on 10/16/24 at 4:35 PM, a family…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure interventions to aid in the healing of pressure ulcers were implemented as per the plan of care for one of five residents (Resident (R) 157) reviewed for pressure ulcers out of a total sample of 45. This failure had the potential to contribute to delayed healing of the resident's pressure ulcer. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Pressure Injury Prevention Policy, dated 07/2023, revealed, . Interventions will be implemented in accordance with physician orders, including the type of prevention devices to be used . Review of R157's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed R157 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke, impaired thought process, and anxiety. Review of R157's Care Plan, dated 05/06/24 and located under the Care Plan tab of the EMR, revealed R157 had a pressure ulcer to her right heel.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that two residents (Resident (R) 110 and R76) from a sample of 45 residents had a way of making sure that medications were secured. This failure has the potential to expose residents to hazards of unsecure medications. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration Policy, dated 03/2023, indicated, It is the policy of this facility to ensure that facility staff follows the guidelines for a safe, timely and accurate administration of resident medications. Procedure . The licensed nurse is responsible to . Assures medications are not left unattended. Keeps medications secured in a locked area or in visible control at all times . 1. Review of R110's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), indicated that R110 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included corneal edema. Review of R110's Order Summary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff donned the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing direct care to two of 13 residents (Resident (R) 110 and R157) on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) out of a total sample of 48. This failure could promote the spread of multi-drug-resistant organisms throughout the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 04/01/24, revealed, . All staff must wear gloves and gowns during high-contact activities for residents identified. Examples of high-contact activities are: Dressing, Bathing/showering, Transferring, Providing hygiene, Changing linens, Changing briefs or assisting with toileting, Device are or use: central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy/ventilator. Wound care: any skin opening requiring a dressing . 1. Review of R110's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the EMR, revealed R110…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-02 · tag F0711 — patternEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's primary physician reviewed, signed and dated the monthly physician orders (PO) to ensure that the resident's current medical regimen was appropriate. This deficient practice was observed for 17 of 35 residents. Resident #202, #239, #29, #30, #53, #137, #157, #245, #257, #165, #236, #58, #148, #152, #146, #127, and #111 were reviewed and found that for several months physicians did not sign resident's monthly POs. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: The surveyors reviewed the hybrid medical records (paper and electronic) for the residents listed above which revealed that the resident's primary physician had not physically signed the Order Summary Reports (monthly physician's orders) located in the residents' chart. In addition, there were no electronic signatures under the physician's orders for the following residents: 1. On 11/16/22, during the review of Resident #202's hybrid medical records, the surveyor observed that the resident's physician had not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-12-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) for staff in accordance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for infection control. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 11/14/22 at 11:21 AM, the surveyor observed the unit 2 Licensed Practical Nurse, Unit Manager (LPN UM) wearing an N 95 mask (a respirator mask) with both of the yellow straps cut and tied behind her ears. The LPN UM stated that she was fit tested to wear this N 95 mask but that it felt too tight to wear so she cut the straps and tied them so the straps go behind her ears. 2. On 11/14/22 at 11:29 AM, the surveyor observed a unit 2 Housekeeper (HK) wearing an N 95 mask on top of a surgical mask. The HK stated that the N 95 mask causes her to have marks on her skin so she wore the surgical mask under it. She stated that she was fit tested for this N 95 mask and had in-services but thought that it was okay to wear the surgical mask under the N 95 mask. 3. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-02 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain professional standards of nursing practice by not following a physician's order for 2 of 10 sampled residents, Resident #94 and #204. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: Reference: New Jersey Statutes Annotated, Title 45, Chapter 11. Nursing Board. The Nurse Practice Act for the State of New Jersey states: The practice of nursing as a licensed practical nurse is defined as performing tasks and responsibilities within the framework of casefinding; reinforcing the patient and family teaching program through health teaching, health counseling and provision of supportive and restorative care, under the direction of a registered nurse or licensed or otherwise legally authorized physician or dentist. 1. On 11/15/22 at 9:20 AM, the surveyor interviewed Resident #94 at bedside. Resident #94 stated they are a Diabetic and their blood sugars have not been taken in a long time but use to be taken…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-02 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 residents were weighed monthly in accordance with physician's orders and facility policy. This deficient practice was identified for 2 of 11 residents, Residents #154 and #127 reviewed for nutrition. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 11/14/22 at 12:18 PM, the surveyor observed Resident #154 lying in bed on a pressure relieving mattress. Resident #154 responded to conversation in English and Spanish (main language). Resident #154 appeared comfortable, awake and alert. The surveyor reviewed the resident's hybrid paper and electronic medical record (EMR). The surveyor reviewed the admission Record (A one-page summary of important information about a resident) belonging to Resident #154. Resident #154 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to Hypothyroidism (when the thyroid gland doesn't produce enough thyroid hormone), Hyperlipidemia (high levels of fat in the blood), and Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain respiratory equipment in a sanitary manner for a resident who was receiving continuous oxygen (O2) and utilizing a BiPap machine (helps push air into your lungs). The deficient practice was identified for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #202) reviewed for respiratory care. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 11/14/22 at 11:35 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #202 laying on bed with O2 in use via a nasal cannula (n/c) set at 2 liters per minute (LPM) attached to the humidified O2 concentrator (a medical device used for delivering O2). The surveyor observed the oxygen tubing was touching the floor. The nurse assigned to Resident #202 was brought inside the room and during the interview, the nurse stated that the oxygen tubing must not be touching the floor. On 11/15/22 at 10:45 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #202 laying on bed with O2 in use via n/c at 2 LPM attached to the humidified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-02 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to evaluate the performance of all Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) on an annual basis. This deficient practice occurred with 5 of 5 CNAs whose personnel records were reviewed and was evidenced by the following: 1. According to data provided by the facility, CNA #1 was hired at the facility on 11/8/16. When reviewed, there were no current annual performance evaluations available in CNA #1's personnel file. When interviewed by the surveyor on 11/23/22 at 1:30 p.m., the Director of Nurses (DON) stated that CNA #1 was due for having her performance reviewed. The DON could not explain why there had been no annual performance evaluations conducted with CNA #1. 2. According to data provided by the facility, CNA #2 was hired at the facility on 11/7/05. When reviewed, there were no current performance evaluations in her personnel file. When interviewed by the surveyor on 11/23/22 at 1:30 p.m., the DON stated that CNA #2 was due for having her performance reviewed. The DON could not explain why there had been…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to label multidose medication containers with the open date. This was found in 1 of 9 medication carts inspected. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 11/16/22 at 11:45 AM the surveyor inspected the Unit 11 medication cart in the presence of the Registered Nurse (RN) who was assigned to the cart. The following multidose medication containers were open and not dated with the open date: Latanoprost ophthalmic solution 2.5 ml multidose bottle Risperdal oral solution 10 ml multidose vial 1 mg/1 ml. Haldol 10 ml multidose vial 5 mg/1 ml. The RN stated the medications should have been dated when they were opened. The RN discarded the medications. On 11/16/22 at 11:30 AM the surveyor reviewed the facility's policy and procedure which was titled Medication Storage with a review date of 7/24/22. The policy included the statement Medications are labeled & dated upon opening, PPD vials/Insulin/Multidose vials. On 11/17/22 at 10:00 AM the surveyor discussed the labeling concern with the Director…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-10-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint #: NJ000163659 and NJ000164821 Based on interviews, and record review, as well as review of pertinent facility documentation on 10/17/23, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently implement their policy on Charting and Documentation for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and #2) reviewed for documentation. This deficient practice is evidenced by the following: 1. According to the admission RECORD (AR), Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis that included but was not limited to: Multiple Sclerosis. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) an assessment tool dated 7/15/23, Resident #1's cognition was intact and required total assistance from staff with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). The Care Plan (CP) revised 8/16/23, indicated that Resident #1 had the potential for skin breakdown secondary to impaired mobility and incontinence. The Documentation Survey Report (DSR) for 5/2023, 6/2023, and 10/2023 and the progress notes (PN) indicated no documented evidence that 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$51,483 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $17,345 — penalty dated 2025-01-30
- $34,138 — penalty dated 2024-10-17
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 OPTIMA CARE — 8 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 3.0 | -2.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 5 of 5 | 3.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 4.0 | -3.0 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OPTIMA CARE RIVERVIEW INVESTMENT, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 08/01/2021 |
| MENDEL, ERIC | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 08/01/2021 |
| RINN, SETH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/30/2024 |
| EMM HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2021 |
| EMPRO STAFFING LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2021 |
| SHIFTSTER LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2021 |
| GOLDSTEIN, MARC | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 7 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.
About 87% 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 $6.3M 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New Jersey Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 315476. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-19, 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.