Taconic Rehabilitation And Nursing At Beacon

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

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

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

54.2% 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 311 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 51.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 143 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 160 beds and averages 146.5 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.26 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.90 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.58 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% 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

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2025-08-01 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00352881), the facility did not ensure a resident received care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote the healing of a pressure ulcers for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed. Specifically, (1) Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a unstageable sacral wound measuring 6 x7cm. Physician orders and preventative measures ordered by the physician were not consistently provided by staff. There were omissions on the October 2023 treatment administration record on multiple days and shifts. Physician wound notes dated 10/24/2023 documented a sacral wound measured 12 x 6.5cm with 98% slough with non-blanchable peri wound with scant drainage; 2) preventative measures were not implemented according to the resident's care plan and/or physician's order. When requested, the facility did not provide documentation that Certified Nursing Aides provided preventative measures ordered by the physician; 3) 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-01 · 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

  Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey from 6/24/2024 through 7/01/2024, the facility did not ensure for 3 of 4 residents (Residents # 322, # 101 and #86) reviewed for urinary catheters, that care was provided in a manner to maintain dignity. Specifically, Residents #322, #101, and #86 had urinary catheter drainage collection bags that were not concealed to prevent direct observation, by other residents and their families. Findings include: 1. Resident #322 had diagnoses including urethral false passage, obstructive and reflux uropathy, and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The admission Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 6/23/2024, documented Resident #322 had moderately impaired cognition, required partial to moderate assistance with activities of daily living and had an indwelling catheter for bladder drainage. The Bladder Appliance care plan dated 6/2024 documented Resident #322 had a urinary catheter related to urinary retention and interventions included catheter care every shift, change catheter bag as needed,…

  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 · D2024-07-01 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
  Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
  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 conducted during the Recertification survey from 06/24/2024 to 07/01/2024, the facility did not ensure the resident and the resident's representative were given the opportunity to participate in the development and implementation of the residents person-centered plan of care. This was evident for 1 (Resident #41) of 32 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility did not include the resident's representative during the planning of their care plan meeting as requested. The findings are: The facility policy titled Comprehensive Care Planning dated 10/2016 documents each resident and his/her family members and/or legal to participate in the development and implementation of his/hers plan of care including the initial planning process and changes to the plan of care. The resident/representative has the right to participate in the planning process including the right to individuals or roles to be included in the planning process. Resident #41 had diagnoses of functional…

  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 · D2024-07-01 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 conducted during the recertification survey from 6/24/2024-7/1/2024, the facility failed to ensure that for 1 of 26 residents, screened for mental disorder or intellectual disability, had an identification number documented on their pre-admission screening and resident review assessment prior to their admission to the facility. Specifically, Resident #420's electronic medical record revealed that the pre-admission screen and resident review (PASRR) assessment dated [DATE] did not include an identification number prior to admission. Findings include: Review of the facility policy for Pre-admission Screening & Resident Review, dated 1/1/2000 and revised 11/2023, documented that a screen was required for every patient/resident prior to admission regardless of length of stay. Resident #420 was admitted with diagnoses which included dementia, muscle weakness, and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of Resident #420 electronic medical record revealed that the pre-admission…

  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 · D2024-07-01 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  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 conducted during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00330557) surveys from 6/24/24 -7/1/24, it was determined for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #320 and #71) reviewed for Nutrition and Hydration, the facility did not ensure the residents were provided the necessary care to maintain an acceptable body weight. Specifically, 1) Resident #320 medical record documented a 24 pound weight gain and the medical provider was not made aware; the physician's orders documented daily weights but Resident #320's weight record did not reflect daily weights; and the facility did not have a system in place to accurately weigh, monitor and report weights. 2) Resident #71's medical record documented a 7.93% weight loss in 30 days with a physician order for a 3-day calorie count, and dietitian recommendations for fortified mash potatoes and to increase the supplement to 4 times a day; there was no documented follow through for the recommendations. The findings are: 1) Resident #320…

  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 · D2024-07-01 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review during recertification survey conducted 6/24/2024 - 7/1/2024, the facility did not ensure menus were followed for 2 of 2 residents (Resident # 61 and # 71) reviewed for Nutrition. Specifically, 1. Residents #61 received fish that was not documented on the meal ticket and 2. Resident # 71 had a meal ticket that documented 4 ounces of mashed potatoes and 4 ounces of enriched mashed potatoes, the tray had 4 ounces of mashed potatoes and Resident #71 did not receive nectar thick apple juice as indicated on the tray ticket. Findings include: A review of the policy and procedure titled Dietary Department admission Procedure, dated 1/1/2000 documented it is the policy that the dietary department will ensure that upon admission the nutritional care plan is developed. On admission the resident's dietary needs are identified. 1. Resident #61 had diagnoses including a fracture femur, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure. An admission Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 5/14/2024 documented the resident's cognition as…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-01 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews conducted during a recertification survey (6/24/24-7/1/24), the facility did not ensure infection control prevention practices including hand hygiene, enhanced barrier precautions, and catheter care were maintained to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 4 ( #37,#61,#322, #86) of 32 sampled residents. Specifically, 1) Staff #11 (Licensed Practical Nurse) did not follow proper hand hygiene during a wound care treatment for Resident #37; 2) Enhanced barrier precautions were not implemented when Staff #9 (Registered Nurse) performed Resident #61's dressing change, and when Staff #8 (Physical Therapy Assistant) handled Resident #322's catheter drainage bag without gloves or a gown; and 3) Resident #86 urine catheter collection bag was observed on the floor. Findings include: 1) Resident #37 was admitted with diagnoses including Diabetes Mellitus, hemiplegia, Dementia, Hypertension and seizures. The Minimum Data…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review during a Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure residents have a right to a dignified existence for 3 of 3 residents screened for dignity. Specifically, Resident #77 was identified by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) using a term that described a symptom of his/her medical condition, Resident #186 received services by a Radiology Technician who did not knock on the residents door before entering, identify himself or the anticipated procedure and Resident #9 who also received radiology services by a technician who entered the resident's room without identifying himself. The findings are: Resident #77 was admitted from the hospital with diagnoses which included Parkinson's Disease, Hypertension (HTN) and Renal Insufficiency. admission Minimum Data Set (MDS; a resident assessment tool) dated 5/17/2021 documents the resident has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS; an assessment tool) of 15/15 indicating that the resident was cognitively…

  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 · D2021-06-10 · 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 interviews and record reviews during a Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure that Comprehensive Care Plans (CCP) were reviewed and revised after each assessment and as needed for changes in the residents' care needs. Furthermore, the facility did not ensure residents/resident representatives were invited to participate in care planning meetings. Specifically, 1) Resident #11's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Care Plan was last updated on 08/18/2020; 2) Resident #12's ADL Care Plan was last updated on 12/09/2020 and resident #12's daughter stated that she has not been invited to any care plan meetings; and 3) Resident #75 stated that he/she is not familiar with Care Plan Meetings. This was evident for 3 of 22 sampled residents. The findings are but not limited to: (1) Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD), Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and Atrial Fibrillation. The Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment…

  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 · E2018-09-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #124 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hemiparesis, Cerebral Infarction, and aphasia (inability to speak). The admission MDS of 8/21/18 indicated the resident had severely impaired cognitive skill for daily decision making and required extensive assistance to being totally dependent on 1-2 person assistance for most activities of daily living. The Physician Orders (PO) form dated 9/5/18 included orders for Doppler examination of the right upper extremity, x-ray of the right hand, and elevate the right upper extremity. The PO order of 9/6/18 included the use of venodynes (a device placed around the legs that inflates and deflates to keep blood circulating in the legs to help prevent the formation of blood clots) and a hematology consult for a diagnosis of Acute RUE (Right Upper Extremity) DVT (Deep Vein Thrombosis). The nursing progress note of 9/7/18 documented that the resident was positive for DVT of the RUE, venodynes for the legs were ordered, and to apply TEDs…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

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 NY