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

Capstone Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing

302 Swart Hill Road, Amsterdam, NY 12010 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (518) 842-6790 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (518) 842-6790 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited May 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citations — no harm found (F0744, F0758)1 actual-harm citation$47,879 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $47,879 in federal fines (most recent 2024-12-10)
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • about 31% 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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1 Front St · (518) 843-4414 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
141 Sanford Farms Shopping Ctr · (518) 843-8332 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
105 Quist Rd · (518) 770-1900 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
105 Cranes Hollow Rd · (518) 843-1058

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 fell from 2 to 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.

Overall rating1★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.8%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.8%5.8%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.0%0.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.2%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.3%19.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.9%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened10.4%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.4%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.1%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.3%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control25.5%19.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.8%13.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.7%78.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.5%20.6%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.5%9.6%12.0%better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

36.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 63 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

36.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
41.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.25U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 41.9% 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 43 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF36.0%CMS range 25.2–46.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.8%CMS range 6.2–13.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge41.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge39.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge46.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 dischargenot 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 stay1.8%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened5.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 3.6–13.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.881.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.49
RN hours/ resident / day
0.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.90
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.17
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.11
RN hoursweekends
52.5%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 116.7 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.17 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.90 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.48 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.45 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.64 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

15
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-12-10)
8
at the previous standard inspection (2022-01-21)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

32 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2024-12-10 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 record review and interview during a recertification survey, the facility did not immediately consult with and or notify resident's physician of a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status for 1 (Resident #115) of 2 residents reviewed. Specially, Resident #115 had a history of chronic respiratory failure, had increased congestion and cough. Resident's health care proxy expressed concern to Registered Nurse #4. Registered Nurse #4 assessed Resident #115 and was noted with altered mental status, decrease in oxygen saturation from 98% to 94%, and abnormal lung sounds. There was no documented evidence that the physician was notified of the change in condition including change in mental status and respiratory distress. There were no new orders to manage resident symptoms. Subsequently, Resident #115 was found not breathing, a code blue was activated cardiopulmonary resuscitation was performed, and resident expired. This resulted in actual harm that was not Immediate…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-26 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during a survey, the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided in a manner that promoted dignity and respect for one (1) (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed and for one (1) of three (3) nursing units observed. Specifically, (a.) During an interview on 5/28/2026, Resident #1's family member reported that the resident's clothes were soaked with urine and were malodorous during several visits. There was evidence that the resident refused their clothes changed several times in June, July, and August 2025 and there was no documented evidence that the nurse was notified and (b.) during observation of the fourth-floor unit on 5/29/2026, a staff member was observed entering three (3) resident rooms without knocking on the door. Findings include:Resident #1: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of unspecified Alzheimer's disease (type of dementia that affects memory, thinking, and behavior), essential (primary) hypertension…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews conducted during a survey, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one (1) (Resident #1) of three (3) residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified when Resident #1 refused medications that included Metoprolol Succinate SR 24-hour 50 milligrams daily ordered for hypertension in June, July, and August 2025, and Levofloxacin 500 milligrams daily, ordered for pneumonia in August 2025. Findings include:Resident #1: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of unspecified Alzheimer's disease (type of dementia that affects memory, thinking, and behavior), essential (primary) hypertension (high blood pressure that is not due to another medical condition), and Non-ST elevation (STEMI) myocardial infarction (heart attack that happens when there is a partial blockage in a coronary artery). The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 08/05/2025, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment),…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity and cared for in a manner that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 6 (Resident #'s 2, 12, 28, 44, 97, and 114) of 35 residents reviewed. Specifically, (a.) Resident #'s 2, 12, 28, and 114 were provided plastic flatware with their meals instead of silver flatware. (b.) Residents #44 and #97 were not talked to in a dignified manner by staff providing care. This is evidenced by: A facility policy Dignity and Quality of Life Policy, not dated, documented that each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promoted and enhanced quality of life, dignity, respect, and individuality. Under the policy section procedure/implementation it was documented that: Residents should be treated with dignity and respect at all times. Staff should promote and ensure each resident had a dignified dining experience through: - Consider…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-10 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not provide effective housekeeping and maintenance services on 1 of 3 resident units and the building exterior. Specifically, the exterior of the building and walls were not clean. This is evidenced by: During observation on 12/03/2024 at 11:17 AM, the walls beneath the hand sanitizer dispensers attached to the walls outside room #s 366, 374, 337, 387, and by the elevator on unit 3 had multiple streak stains around the dispenser that descended to the baseboard. During observations on 12/04/2024 at 5:29 PM, the walls beneath the hand sanitizer dispensers attached to the walls outside room #s 237, 266, 274, 279, and 287 had multiple streak stains that descended to the baseboard. During observation on 12/09/2024 at 11:35 AM, the walls beneath the hand sanitizer dispensers attached to the walls outside room #s 366, 374, 337, and 387 had multiple streak stains around the dispenser that descended to the baseboard. During observations on 12/09/2024 at 8:15 AM and again on 12/10/2024 at 12:15…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-12-10 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — pattern
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure pain management was provided to each resident in accordance with professional standards of care for 3 (Resident #'s 22, 25, and 317) of 4 residents reviewed for pain management. Specifically over a two-month period, the facility did not evaluate their existing pain and the cause(s), and managing or preventing pain, consistent with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care, current professional standards of practice, and the resident's goals and preferences. This resulted in residents' pain symptoms not being relieved to the extent possible. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Pain Management, dated 3/17/2018 and last updated 8/2024, documented the resident's pain level was to be checked every shift, and documented in the resident's Medication Administration Record. Pain levels should have been determined using a scale appropriate to the resident's cognitive level and pain…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-10 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00353512), the facility did not ensure the provision of sufficient nursing staff to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident throughout the facility. Specifically, the facility's staffing minimum staffing levels were not met each day from 12/02/2024 through 12/10/2024 per facility assessment. This is evidenced by: Upon entrance to the facility on [DATE] there were 118 residents residing on 3 units. The Facility assessment dated 2024 and based on a resident population profile from 7/23/2023 to 7/23/2024 documented, the facility's staffing plan for direct residential care. The assessment documented that the facility strived to have at a maximum for staff the following: Each floor was provided with 2 Licensed Practical Nurses and 5 Certified Nurse Assistants on days (6:00 AM to 2:00 PM), 2 Licensed Practical Nurses and 4 Certified Nurse…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-12-10 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — pattern
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care. Specifically, the facility nursing staff did not document unit narcotics were counted by two licensed staff members and signed as appropriately done on the facility provided narcotic record sheets. This is evidenced by: The Facility assessment dated 2024 and based on a resident population profile from 7/23/2023 to 7/23/2024 documented, Staff Training/competency/skill sets that were necessary to provide the level and types of care needed for the resident population: The facility had a full time Nurse Educator who maintained a list of position- based competencies for nursing staff which was position dependent. An annual education calendar was utilized and…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-12-10 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — pattern
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for 4 (Resident #s 3, 12, 22, and 25) of 30 residents reviewed. Specifically, for Resident #'s 3, 12, 22 and 25, the facility did not ensure accurate medication administration and documentation of Oxycodone (narcotic pain medication). This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Medication Administration, revised 6/2024, documented medications would be administered by a licensed and/or registered nurse. All medications and treatments would be administered and documented using the electronic medical record. Narcotic medications were to be signed for in the control drug book (Control Substance Record) at the time they were administered, and the administration was to be documented in the electronic Medical Administration Record. Discarded Narcotics required two (2) signatures of Licensed Practical Nurse or Registered Nurse staff and Rreview 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-12-10 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — pattern
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    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 during a recertification and complaints survey (NY00349706, NY00352500, NY00353512, and NY00359446), the facility did not ensure it was administered in a manner that enabled the facility to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 9 (Resident #'s 18, 22, 25, 96, 101, 103, 108, 317, and 319) of 9 residents reviewed. Specifically, for Resident #'s 18, 22, 25, 96, 101, 103, 108, 317, and 319, the facility was unable to provide documented proof of electronic medication administration that could identify the actual time the medication was administered to each resident that would support medication was given as ordered. This was evidenced by: Document requests were given to the facility from 12/5/2024 through 12/10/2024 until time of exit on 12/10/2024 at 4:45 PM for checked marked electronic medications administration records that were time stamped…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation for 1(Resident #86) of 30 residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure Resident #86 had a call device they were able to use and was accessible to the resident. This is evidenced by: Resident #86 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of end stage renal disease, generalized muscle weakness, and need for assistance with personal care. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 9/16/2024, documented the resident was cognitively intact, could be understood, and understand others. The resident had upper extremity impairment on both sides. The Care Plan for Comfort Care/End of Life, updated 11/15/2024, documented the resident was admitted to Hospice on 11/14/2024 for end-of-life care related to end stage renal disease. Goals documented resident would have their wishes for supportive end of life care honored and the resident would be supported emotionally, physically, and…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 21 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that Comprehensive Care Plans were reviewed and revised to meet the needs of each resident for 2 (Residents #16 and #79) of 30 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #16 and Resident #79 had multiple falls and the patient centered Comprehensive Care Plans were not updated to reflect number of falls with corresponding interventions and goals to prevent falls. This is evidenced by: The facility's Policy and Procedure titled Care Planning, Minimum Data Set (is a standardized assessment tool that measures health status in nursing home residents) Assessments and Minimum Data Set Interviews effective 4/2015 and last revised 2/2024, documented PHILOSOPHY: It is the policy of the facility to provide each resident with current care plans reflecting their needs to maintain optimal ability as able and to keep current with Professional Standards. PURPOSE: To evaluate and assess each resident's status and plan of care in…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
    Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
    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, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a dependent resident was provided with appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve their language and communication for 1 (Resident #367) of 1 reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Specifically, nursing staff did not provide Resident #367 with adequate, consistent interpreter services in accordance with professional standards of care. This was evidenced by: The facility's Policy and Procedure titled Communication effective 6/19/2029 and reviewed 3/2024, documented its Purpose: To provide our residents who communicate with non-oral communication devices, sign language, or who speak a language other than the dominate language of the facility (English) the highest practicable level of quality of life and the resources to achieve just that. Social Services kept an up-to-date list of all of our residents who communicate with non-oral communication devices, sign language, or who speak a…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-10 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure ongoing provision of programs to support each resident and their choices of activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 2 (Resident #49, and #367) of 4 residents reviewed. Specifically, Residents #49, and #367 did not consistently attend meaningful, accommodating activities to maintain their highest practicable quality of life. This is evidenced by: The Facility's Policy and Procedure titled Activity Assessment and Programming, undated, documented, The purpose of this policy was to establish a framework for meaningful, individualized activities that promote physical, cognitive, emotional, and social well-being of each resident. The goal was to offer activities that enhanced residents' quality of life by fostering independence, engagement, and a sense of purpose, while respecting each individual's preferences and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a resident who was fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 2 (Resident #s 114 and 172) of 2 residents reviewed. Specifically, for Resident #s 114 and 172, the facility did not ensure (a.) multiuse feeding sets (syringe/bottle) were labeled with the date opened and disposed of within 24 hours; (b) opened multiuse bottles of formula were labeled with the date/time opened and discarded within 48 hours. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Tube Feeding and Tube Care, reviewed 6/2024, documented the policy was written to provide guidance and general guidelines for administration of enteral feedings by the licensed nurse. Administration of feeding documented label the outside of the container (formula) with the date, time, and initials if appropriate (i.e. multiuse bottles). Prevention of bacterial contamination…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each resident received respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #86) of 3 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #86's oxygen tubing was not changed on 12/01/2024 as ordered by the physician. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Oxygen Therapy - Mask and Nasal Cannula, revised 5/2024, documented all oxygen must be prescribed and dispensed in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Oxygen administration would be monitored by the licensed nurse and documented on the Treatment Administration Record and in the electronic medical record. Resident #86 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (decreased perfusion of oxygen to the tissues), end stage renal disease, and generalized muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 9/16/2024, documented the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was able to make…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards of practice, for 2 of 2 medication rooms reviewed (200 unit and 300 unit), and 3 of 3 medication carts reviewed (200, 300, and 400 units). Specifically, (a.) opened medications had no open and/or expiration dates; (b.) opened stock eye drops were not labeled with resident's name; (c.) medication refrigerator temperature was outside of therapeutic range; (d.) non-medication items were stored in narcotic cabinet; (e) a narcotic box was not secured with double lock; and (d) open cups of food were stored in medication cart. This is evidenced by: The facility's Policy and Procedure tilted Medication Storage Date Revised: 3/2023 documented, Medications would be stored in an orderly, organized manner in a clean area. Expired, discontinued and/or contaminated medications would be removed from the medication storage areas and disposed of in accordance with facility policy.…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-10 · tag F0773 — isolated
    Provide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during a recertification and abbreviated survey (Case# NY00349706), the facility did not ensure it promptly notified the ordering physician of laboratory results that fell outside of clinical reference ranges per the ordering physician's orders for 1 (Resident #269) of 1 resident reviewed. Specifically, the ordering physician was not notified when Resident #269's blood sugar results were outside of the clinical reference range on 7/11/2024, 7/12/2024, 7/18/2024 and 7/19/2024. This is evidenced by: Resident #269 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of type 1 diabetes without complications, urinary tract infection, and muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 10/10/2024, documented the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was able to make themselves understood and understood others. The Policy and Procedure titled, Medication Administration Time Guidelines, revised 2/2024, documented fingersticks as ordered by the physician. The Policy and Procedure titled, Resident Status Change/Physician/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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (Case # NY00295962 and NY00319632), the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source were reported immediately, but not later than two (2) hours after the allegation was made to the State Survey Agency for 2 of 2 qualifying reportable incident and accident investigations. Specifically, when Resident #2 and Resident #3 were observed with injuries of an unknown origin, the facility conducted investigations into the incidents, however, never reported them to the New York State Department of Health. The findings include: The Policy and Procedure titled Abuse, last revised February April 2023, read in pertinent part, that each resident had the right to be free from abuse, corporal punishment, and involuntary seclusion as well as mistreatment, neglect and misappropriation of property. Residents must not be subjected to abuse by anyone including but not limited to facility staff, other residents, consultant, volunteers,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-28 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolated
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00302737), the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff were available to provide nursing services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that a resident was permitted to return to an available bed in the location in which they previously resided. Specifically, Resident #10 was sent to the hospital on 9/09/2022 for evaluation, and not permitted to return after medically cleared to return back to facility. The facility stated they could not provide 1:1 care to the resident upon a readmission from the hospital until such time a safe discharge could be secured. This is evidenced by: Resident #10 was admitted with diagnoses of unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, post-traumatic stress disorder, and Alzheimer's Disease. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 9/01/2022, documented the resident had significant cognitive impairment, could be understood and could sometimes…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (Case # NY00294993), the facility did not provide needed care and services that were resident centered and in accordance with professional standards of practice to meet each resident's physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for 1 (Resident #1) of 7 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #1 order for urinalysis with culture and sensitivity on 5/02/2022 was not obtained in a timely manner with urine culture obtained on 05/10/2022, and the provider was not notified when staff's attempt to obtain a urine sample was unsuccessful. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Lab Services Protocol, last revised May 2023, documented Licensed Practical Nurses/ Registered Nurses were to ensure collection of ordered specimens. Any outstanding specimens needed, such as urine or stool, should be reported to the oncoming nurse. If an ordered specimen was not obtained in 2 days, the physician would to be notified for further orders. If nursing…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-01-21 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not provide effective housekeeping and maintenance services. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that on 3 of 3 resident units' walls and floors were clean and/or in good repair. This is evidenced as follows: During observations on 01/14/22 at 10:30AM, the bathroom in resident room [ROOM NUMBER], the right foot-peddle to the bed pan washer was laying on the floor under the sink, and the floor was heavily soiled with dirt and a brown build-up. During observations on 01/14/22 at 12:45 PM and on 01/19/22 at 9:15 AM, walls were scraped or had unpainted spackling in resident room #'s 258, 366, 379, 443, 437, 456, 474, 483, and #489 and the 3rd floor common area. The floors were soiled with dirt or food debris in resident room #'s 437, 456, and #489. During an interview on 01/14/22 at 10:50AM and again on 01/18/2022 at 3:30 PM, the Director of Plant Operations stated maintenance was not aware of and did not have a work…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-01-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, manufacturer's directions review, and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the automatic dishwashing machine final rinse was not sanitizing, the concentration of quaternary ammonium compound (QAC) utilized to manually sanitize food contact equipment was less than that required by the manufacturer, and 3 of 3 kitchenettes required cleaning and repairs. This is evidenced as follows: The main kitchen and resident unit kitchenettes were inspected on 01/13/22 at 09:30 AM. The concentration of sanitizing chemical in the final rinse of the automatic dishwashing machine final rinse was zero (0) parts per million (ppm) of available chlorine. The label directions on the sanitizing chemical concentrate state the concentration in the final rinse is to be between 50 ppm and 100 ppm of available chlorine. The concentration of QAC used to sanitize food contact equipment in the 3-compartment sink was found to be zero (0)…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-01-21 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure treatment with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for 1 (Resident #55) of 2 residents reviewed for dignity. Specifically, for Resident #55, the facility did not ensure facility staff responded to the residents call light from the time it was turned on at 10:35 AM until 11:20 AM (forty five minutes). Nine staff members were observed walking past the resident's call light during this time period. This was evidenced by: The Policy & Procedure titled Call Lights and dated 06/2021, documented, the purpose of call bells was to respond to residents request for assistance in a timely manner and meet their immediate needs. All nursing personnel must be aware of call lights at all times. All nursing staff is expected to answer all call lights and address…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-01-21 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
    Honor 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 observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure prompt efforts were made to resolve a grievance for 1 (Resident #84) of 3 residents reviewed for dental services. Specifically, for Resident #84, the facility did not ensure the facility's process for missing property was followed when the resident's representative reported the facility lost the resident's dentures and that the resident could not eat without them. Additionally, the resident representative was not appropriately apprised of the progress toward a resolution and as of 1/20/2022, Resident #84 had not been seen by the dentist to initiate the process of getting new dentures. This is evidenced by: Resident #84: Resident #84 was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses of cerebral infarction, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and major depressive disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 12/13/2021, documented the resident was cognitively intact, could understand others and could make self understood. The facility Policy…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-01-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 (Resident #84) of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. Specifically, for Resident #84, who was dependent on staff for ADL care, the facility did not ensure the resident's fingernails were cleaned and trimmed in accordance with the resident's preference and comprehensive care plan. This is evidenced by: Resident #84: Resident #84 was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses of cerebral infarction, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and major depressive disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 12/13/2021, documented the resident was cognitively intact, could understand others and could make self understood. The Policy and Procedure titled Resident Nail Care dated 5/2021, documented resident nail care was to be done weekly with their scheduled shower, may be done sooner if…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-01-21 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents diagnosed with dementia, received the appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his or her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #19) of 2 residents reviewed for dementia care. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that person-centered care plans with individualized interventions that included and supported the residents' dementia care needs were developed. This is evidenced by: Resident #19: Resident #19 was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses of Parkinson's disease, dementia, and hypertension. The Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment tool) dated 10/15/2021, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was sometimes able to make self understood and understand others. The Policy & Procedure titled Dementia & Memory Care-Clinical Protocol last reviewed 6/2021, documented for the individual with confirmed dementia, the IDT (interdisciplinary team) will identify a resident-centered care plan…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-01-21 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure as needed (PRN) orders for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days, unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner believed it was appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, they should document their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order for 1 (Resident #71) of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Specifically, for Resident #71, the facility did not ensure a PRN lorazepam (Ativan- antianxiety medication) was not ordered for more than 14 days without a documented rationale and duration from the attending physician or prescribing practitioner. This is evidenced by: Resident #71: Resident #71 was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses of dysphagia, anxiety disorder and dementia with behavioral disturbance. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 12/7/2021 documented the resident had severely impaired cognition, could usually understand others and could usually make self…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-01-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview during a recertification survey, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program (IPCP) to prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection for 1 (3rd floor) of 3 units observed for dining. Specifically, the facility did not ensure staff assisted residents on the 3rd floor with hand hygiene before meals. This is evidenced by: The facility Policy and Procedure titled Infection Control Program Manual dated 9/2021, documented standard precautions for infection control were used for the care of all residents regardless of their diagnoses or presumed infection status. Hands were washed after touching blood, body fluids, secretions, excretions, and contaminated items. During an observation on 1/14/2022 at 9:04 AM, breakfast trays were being passed to residents on the 3rd floor. The staff were not observed assisting residents with hand hygiene. During an observation and interview on 1/18/2022 from 12:00 PM to 12:13 PM, meal trays were being passed to residents in the back hallway on the 3rd floor. Staff did 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-10-22 · tag F0655 — pattern
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    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, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not develop and implement, or provide the resident and their representative with a summary of the baseline care plan for 8 (Resident #'s 3, 37, 40, 55, 65, 67, 90 and #219) of 12 residents reviewed. Specifically: for Resident #'s 3 and 55, the facility did not ensure summaries of the baseline care plans were provided to the resident and the resident's representative; and for Resident #65, the facility did not ensure development and implementation of a baseline care plan. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Care Planning, MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment and MDS Interviews dated 7/2019, stated a baseline care plan is initiated upon 48 hours of admission and a summary of the resident's baseline care plan will be provided to the resident and their representative. Resident #3: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of dementia, hypertension, and chronic…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-10-22 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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 and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities for 3 (Resident #'s 25, 77, and #87) of 3 residents reviewed for activities. Specifically, the facility did not ensure residents were provided, an ongoing program to support them in their choice of activities designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, based on the comprehensive assessment, care plan and preferences of the resident. The findings are: Resident #25: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of dementia, depression, and anxiety disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 7/25/19, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) for Activities, last updated on 10/4/19, documented the resident was to be encouraged to attend group activities 4 times per month,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-22 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    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, record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis facility regarding dialysis care and services for 1 (Resident # 90) of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis. Specifically, the facility did not ensure there was resident-specific communication between the dialysis center and the facility. This was evidenced by: Resident #90: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis of end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis and diabetes. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) documented the resident was cognitively intact and is able to make self-understood and can understand others. A review of the policy titled Dialysis Care and Management of Residents on Dialysis dated 7/2019, documented to maintain communication with dialysis. A licensed nurse is to review the communication book upon the residents return to the facility and dialysis is to be called by 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$47,879 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $47,879 — penalty dated 2024-12-10

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 UPSTATE SERVICES GROUP — 17 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 52.0-1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 1 of 52.1-1.1 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.6+0.4 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 16 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
KOENIG, URIIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST60%since 12/22/2010
STEIF, EFRAIMIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST40%since 12/22/2010
REHMAN, HAFEEZIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 04/01/2022
EDWARDS, JESSICAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 11/18/2019
WUERTZER, AMYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/14/2017

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.

$11.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-15.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$4.0M
Related-party expense31% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 3%Other / private 14%

About 83% 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 $4.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 31% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$311per resident / day
operating cost
$9,469per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$271per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in NY

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in New York
$15,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,110/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335543. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-10, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next