Boro Park Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare

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.

58.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 1,150 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 74.8% 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 778 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 0.65 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 38% 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 510 beds and averages 489.2 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 21 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 3.65 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.28 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 3.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.80 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.76 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

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 · E2024-05-06 · tag F0577 — pattern
  Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 04/20/2024 to 05/06/2024, the facility did not ensure that the survey results were posted in a place readily accessible to residents, visitors, or legal representatives where individuals wishing to examine survey results do not have to ask to see them. In addition, notices of the availability of such reports were not posted in areas of the facility that are prominent and accessible to the public. Specifically, the survey results were located inside a binder placed behind the Security desk, and there were only two notices posted about the availability of the survey results, and the notices which were not in conspicuous locations. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure titled Survey Results revised on 10/2015 stated that copies of all survey reports along with approved plans of correction are on file in the administrative office, and that survey results must be readily accessible for viewing. The policy also documented that residents, visitors etc. should not be…

  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 · E2024-05-06 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from [DATE] to [DATE], the facility did not ensure medications and biologicals were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and expiration date, if applicable. This was evident for 2 of 16 medication storage areas (2 East medication room and 2 [NAME] Unit medical supply room). Specifically, 13 bags of expired intravenous fluids were observed in the medication room on unit 2 East, and 12 bags of expired intravenous fluids were observed in the medical supply closet on 2 West. This was evident for the Medication Storage task. The findings are: The facility policy titled Medication Storage revised [DATE] documented the facility will store medications in a manner that maintains the integrity of the product, ensures the safety of the residents, and is in accordance with state and federal regulations. Expired, discontinued and or contaminated medications will be removed from the medication…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-06 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/29/2024 to 05/06/2024, the facility did not ensure food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food service safety to prevent foodborne illness. Specifically, 1) expired enteral feeding was observed in the nourishment/supplement room in the kitchen, and 2) there was unlabeled food, degraded, rotted food and expired yogurt in the 5th floor unit refrigerator, and expired ice cream in the freezer. This was evident for the Kitchen Task and Dining Task. The findings are: 1. The facility policy titled Food Safety Food Handling revised 09/2021 documented food will be stored, prepared, handled, and served so that they reduce the risk of foodborne illness is minimized. This policy does not contain any information in relation to the rotation of food items or when food items may need to be discarded. The facility policy titled Enteral Nutrition revised 12/2019 documented the facility provides…

  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 · D2024-05-06 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 4/29/2024 to 5/6/2024, the facility did not ensure residents remained free from physical restraints. This was evident for 1 (Resident #151) of 1 resident reviewed for Restraints out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #151's right hand was observed wrapping by a towel to prevent the free movement of the hand and there was no documented evidence of an evaluation or physician's order for use of a restraint. The findings are: The facility policy titled Restraint Use with creation date 10/2015 and last revised date 12-2022 documented restraints shall only be used to treat the resident's medical symptom and shall not be imposed for the purposes of discipline, staff convenience or that unnecessarily inhibits a resident's freedom of movement or activity. Resident #151 had diagnoses which included Cerebral infarction, Alzheimer's disease, and Dysphagia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set 3.0 dated…

  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 · D2024-05-06 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 04/29/2024 to 05/06/2024, the facility did not ensure residents unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene. This was evident for 1 (Resident #263) of 5 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #263 did not receive bladder/bowel care in a timely manner. The findings are: The facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Care and Support with creation date 8/2016 and current revision date of 3/13/2024 documented that activities of daily living will be provided for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently, with consent of the resident and in accordance with the resident's assessed needs, personal preferences, and individualized plan of care. Resident #263 had diagnoses which included Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, Dysphagia, 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 · D2024-05-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, conducted during the Recertification survey from 04/29/2024 to 05/06/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident received care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers and to promote healing. This was evident for 2 (Resident #523 and Resident #380) of 7 residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcer out of 38 sampled residents. Specifically, 1) during multiple observations Resident #523 was observed without heel booties in place as ordered and, 2) Resident #380 was observed during wound assessment with loose stool and an uncovered Stage 3 sacral pressure ulcer. The findings are: The facility policy titled Skin and Pressure Ulcer Injury Prevention effective October 2014, last revised March 13, 2023, documented that the facility will assess residents for risk in the development of pressure injuries and implement preventative measures in accordance with current standards of practice. Risks that increase a resident's…

  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 before2022-04-21 · 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure food was prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety to prevent foodborne illness. This was observed during Kitchen observation. Specifically, 1) expired food was observed in a kitchen refrigerator; and 2) tray line food was not maintained at an acceptable temperature to prevent foodborne illness and were not discarded. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Food Storage Policy revised 1/25/2022 documented left-over food will be stored in covered containers, clearly labeled and dated, and will be checked to assure the food is consumed by the use by dates indicated once food is opened. The facility policy titled Food Safety-Food handling Policy revised on 09/2021 documented there is a potential for foodborne illness with inadequate cooking and improper holding temperatures. The facility policy and procedure titled Food Temperature Policy revised 02/2021 documented food temperatures…

  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 · D2022-04-21 · tag F0582 — isolated
  Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/14/22 to 4/21/22, the facility did not provide the appropriate liability notices were provided to Medicare beneficiaries. Specifically, the facility did not provide residents/representatives with a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) at the termination of Medicare Part A benefits within the required timeframes and did not provide residents/representatives with a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNFABN) when they were remaining in the facility for care. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Skilled Nursing Facility Beneficiary Protection Notification out of a total sample of 38 residents. (Resident #263) The findings are: The Form Instructions for the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) CMS-10123 documented that the NOMNC must be delivered at least two calendar days before Medicare covered services end or the second to last day of service if care is not being provided daily. The Form Instructions for Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced…

  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 · D2022-04-21 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview during a Recertification survey conducted from 4/14/22 to 4/21/22, the facility did ensure that each resident who experiences a significant change in status is comprehensively assessed. Specifically, a Significant Change in Status Assessment was not completed following the start of hospice services. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Hospice and End of Life out of a sample of 38 residents (Resident #245). The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure entitled Change in Resident's Condition dated 2/22 documented a significant change of condition is a major decline or improvement in the resident's status that will not normally resolve itself without intervention by staff or by implementing standard disease related clinical interventions, impacts more than one area of the resident's health status, and requires interdisciplinary review and/or revision to the care plan. It further documented if a significant change conditions occurs, a comprehensive…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-04-21 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/14/22 to 4/21/22, the facility did not ensure they electronically transmitted encoded, accurate, and complete MDS data to the CMS System within 14 days. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Resident Assessment out of a sample of 38 residents. (Resident #3) The findings are: The facility policy titled MDS completion and submission created on 10/2014, last revised 2/2021, documented that the facility will conduct and submit resident assessments in accordance with current federal and state submission timeframes. The timeframe for transmission of MDS assessments is specified as 14 calendar days after completion. Review of the facility Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented that a Quarterly MDS for Resident #3 dated 2/14/22 was completed on 2/26/22 and not accepted. The EMR also documented a submit by date of 3/12/22. On 04/21/22 at 11:11 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of MDS (DMDS) who stated that the MDS was accepted on 3/14/22 and the CMS Submission Report was…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CENTERS HEALTH CARE — 36 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $8.5M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent 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