Sheepshead Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

53.6% 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 714 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 67.5% 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 354 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 200 beds and averages 194.5 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.41 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 3.86 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.84 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% 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 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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-03-09 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (538273), the facility failed to ensure that an alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, were reported immediately, but not later that two (2) hours after the allegation is made, if the events that caused the allegation involved or resulted in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that caused the allegation do not involved abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for judications in long term care facilities) set forth at S483.12(c)(1). This was evident for one (1) out of three (3} residents sampled (Resident #1). Specifically, on 01/31/2025, the Director of Nursing received a call from a detective at the Attorney General's office stating after Resident #1 was discharged , they reported that sometime between 01/09/2025 and…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-24 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — pattern
  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 record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/2024 to 4/24/2024, the facility did not ensure that resident and/or resident's designated representative were offered the opportunity to participate in the revision and/or review of the comprehensive care plan. Specifically, resident and/or resident's designated representatives were not invited to participate in their care plan meetings. This was evident for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for Care Plan (Residents #82, #111, and #104). The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure titled Comprehensive Care Plan reviewed 01/2024 documented that the resident and/or responsible party are members of interdisciplinary care team and are encouraged to actively participate in the development and review of comprehensive care plan. It also documented that each resident and responsible party will be notified by the Social Service department of the date and time for each interdisciplinary care team meeting. 1) Resident #82 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-24 · tag F0575 — pattern
  Post a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/24 to 4/24/24, the facility did not ensure that information regarding the Ombudsman program and the New York State Nursing Home Complaint Hotline were posted in a manner accessible to residents and resident representatives. Specifically, notices were posted in a bulletin board on one side of the unit only that was frequently obstructed by medication carts. The findings are: On 04/19/24 at 10:02 AM, the Resident Council meeting was held with nine residents. Six out of nine residents who regularly attended the meetings stated that they did not know where the Ombudsman's contact information was posted and how to formally complain to the State about the care they are receiving. Observations were made on 04/19/24 AM between 09:20 AM and 02:33 PM on all units (Units 1 to 5) of the facility. Notices were observed on resident units that documented the information related to contacting both the Ombudsman's office and the New York State Nursing Home Complaint Hotline however, the notices were displayed…

  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 · E2024-04-24 · 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 and interview conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/24 to 4/24/24 the facility did not ensure that the most recent survey results and plan of correction were posted in a place readily accessible to residents, family members, and legal representatives of residents and did not post notice of the availability of such reports in areas of the facility that are prominent and accessible to the public. Specifically, survey results were posted in the Family Room on the 2nd Floor and notices regarding the availability of the survey results were not readily accessible. In addition, members of the Resident Council were interviewed and reported that they did not know where survey results were posted or accessible for residents to review. The findings are: On 04/19/24 at 10:02 AM, the Resident Council meeting was held with nine residents. The residents were asked if they had knowledge of where the most recent survey results were posted or located, and all the nine residents stated that they did not know where to locate the survey results. On 04/19/24 at 01:45…

  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 · D2024-04-24 · 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, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/2024 to 4/24/2024, 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 2 (Resident #169 and Resident #171) of 3 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #169 and Resident #171 were observed with quarter to one-third inch fingernails beyond fingertips and did not receive staff assistance for trimming of long nails. The findings are: The facility policy titled Assisting the Resident with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) with a revised date of 01.2024 documented the residents will be expected to maintain reasonable standards of hygiene and grooming during their stay at the facility. The policy also documented that the care staff will provide the necessary support in all activities of daily living functioning when…

  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 · D2024-04-24 · tag F0685 — isolated
  Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review conducted during a Recertification survey from 4/17/2024 to 4/24/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents received proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain vision abilities. This was evident for 1 (Resident #82) of 1 resident reviewed for Communication/Sensory out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #82 did not receive an Ophthalmology consult in accordance with Medical Doctor order in a timely order. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Consultations revised 1/2024 documented that it is the policy of Sheepshead Nursing and Rehabilitation Center to provide care and services including medical consultations to the residents to maintain or improve their highest practicable mental, psychosocial, and physical functional status. On 04/17/24 at 11:05AM, an interview was conducted with Resident #82 who stated that they have a small cataract on their eye and reported it to nurse. Resident #82 also stated that they had not been seen by the eye doctor. The Comprehensive Care Plan titled Vision created…

  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 · D2024-04-24 · 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 staff interviews, during the Recertification survey from 4/17/2024 to 4/24/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident received care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers. This was evident for 1 (Resident #150) of 3 residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcer. Specifically, during multiple observations, Resident #150 was observed without multipodus boot/brace in place as ordered. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Heel Protectors: Application & Maintenance revised 1/2024 documented that the purpose of heel protectors is to provide comfort and protection to the resident's heel, prevent skin irritation, and maintain proper skin hygiene. Resident #150 was admitted with diagnoses which include Pressure Ulcer of left heel, unstageable, Dementia, and Depression. The Annual Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented Resident #150 was severely cognitively impaired, required substantial/maximal assistance with…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-24 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for 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 reviews and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/24 to 4/24/24, the facility did not ensure that a resident with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion. This was evident for 1 (Resident #60) of 2 residents reviewed for Position/Mobility out of a sample of 38 residents. Specifically, Resident #60 had an active Physician order for a left hand palm protector and was observed without left hand palm device on multiple occasions. The findings are: Resident # 60 diagnoses include Atrial Fibrillation, Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Vascular Accident and Hemiplegia. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #60's cognitive level as moderately impaired. Resident #60 had impairment in one side of the upper extremities and impairments in both side of the lower extremities. Resident #60 required maximal assistance for eating, toileting, upper and lower body…

  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 · D2024-04-24 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/2024 to 4/24/2024, the facility did not ensure timely identification and removal of expired medications. Specifically, seven individual expired Heparin lock flush syringes were stored on medication carts. This was evident on 2 of 5 units. (2nd and 4th floor) The findings are: The facility policy titled Ordering, Distributing and Storage of Supplies revised 01/2024 documented that nurses shall check every medication for the expiration date before administration. All unused or expired drugs are to be removed by the medication nurse from the medication room, carts and refrigerators and discarded per policy. On 04/17/2024 at 02:42 PM, five Heparin Lock Flush syringes were observed in the medication cart on the 4th floor. On 04/17/2024 at 03:33 PM, the Registered Nurse Supervisor (Registered Nurse #2) was interviewed and stated that the nurse on the unit and the Pharmacist check the carts. They check for expired medications and locked carts are functioning properly and if they need…

  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 · Dcited before2024-04-24 · 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, record review and interview conducted during the Recertification survey from 4/17/2024 to 4/24/2024, the facility did not ensure that infection prevention and control program was maintained to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, residents were not offered appropriate hand hygiene prior to lunch meal being served. This was evident for 2 (Resident #39 and Resident #111) of 18 residents observed during the Dining observation on Unit 2. Resident #39 and Resident #111 were observed being wheeled into the dining area, placed at the dining table, and served a lunch meal without being offered or provided hand hygiene. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Hand Washing and Hand Sanitizers revised 1/2024. documented hands should be washed before eating. On 04/17/24 at 12:25 PM, an observation was made on the 2nd floor dining area where lunch was being served. There were 18 residents, 5 Certified Nursing Assistants and 2…

  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

“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 10 rows in the source record cover these 9 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 $7.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in NY