Ontario Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare
3062 County Complex Drive, Canandaigua, NY 14424 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 98 certified beds · (585) 396-4345 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $117,878 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-31)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (81%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 8.4% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.9% | 5.8% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.2% | 1.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 12.2% | 19.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.4% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.9% | 13.2% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.0% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.3% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.7% | 19.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.2% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.1% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 82.6% | 78.8% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.6% | 20.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 20.5% | 9.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.16 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 4.44 | 1.36 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
42.1% 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 81 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 60.0% 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 50 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 42% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 42.1%CMS range 30.8–51.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.5%CMS range 7.4–13.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 60.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 46.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 48.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.0%CMS range 3.5–11.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.01 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 98 beds and averages 94.5 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 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 3.02 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 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 2.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.29 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 81% is well above the national median of 45%. 4 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
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.
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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2025-01-31 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the extended Recertification Survey and complaint investigations (#NY00349354, #NY00357725, #NY00362904) from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, the facility failed to ensure residents' right to be free from abuse, mistreatment or neglect for six (6)(Residents #8, #48, #65, #73, #76 and #350) of eight (8) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. Specifically, Resident #8 and Resident #48 did not receive timely incontinence care. Resident #65 did not receive wound care as ordered by the physician for multiple days and was not assisted with toileting or incontinence care for approximately six hours. Resident #73 was left sitting in their wheelchair in their room for approximately 14 hours without incontinence care despite multiple attempts to alert staff via call light and telephone calls to the nurse's station. Resident #76 waited approximately 21 hours for incontinence care to be provided and wet linens changed. Resident #350 did not receive wound…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · H2025-01-31 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, for two (Second Floor and Third Floor) of two resident units, the facility did not ensure sufficient staffing to provide nursing services to attain or maintain the highest practical physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for residents in the facility. Specifically, there were multiple observations of residents incontinent of bladder or bowel for extended periods of time, several residents who reported going weeks without showers and observed unkept with unclean hair. This resulted in psychosocial harm to Residents' #8, #28, #65, #73 and #76 that is not Immediate Jeopardy and is evidenced by the following: For additional information see the Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services Form 2567: F600 Free from Abuse and Neglect, F677 Activities of Daily Care Provided for Dependent Residents, F585 Grievances, F550 Resident Rights/Exercise of Rights, F684 Quality of Life, and F686 Treatment/Services to Prevent/Heal Pressure Ulcers. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2025-01-31 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (#NY00349354) from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, for four (4) (Resident #8, #28, #48, and #350) of seven (7) residents reviewed, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with respect, dignity, and care in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of quality of life. Specifically, Residents #8 and #350 did not receive timely emptying of their urinal (a device used to urinate in) resulting in spillage on the resident or having to empty the urinal out a window in order to use it. Resident #28 did not receive timely incontinence care and had not received a shower for four (4) weeks. Resident #48 was observed on multiple occasions with urine soaked through their incontinence brief, incontinence pad, and bed linens. This resulted in psychosocial harm to Resident #8, #28, and #48 that is not Immediate Jeopardy and no actual harm with potential for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure comfortable and safe temperature levels were maintained for residents residing on two (2) of two (2) resident use floors (Second (2nd) floor and Third (3rd) floor). Specifically, multiple residents were exposed to cold ambient air temperatures, reported feeling cold, and one (1) resident was observed actively shivering.The findings include: The facility policy Temperature - Room, dated August 2022, documented facility rooms would be maintained at an ambient air temperature range between 71 to 81 degrees Fahrenheit. Temperatures would be measured as needed when there was a complaint about air temperature and concerns would be reported to maintenance and administration for review and further actions as necessary. In the event temperatures were affected through equipment failure, temperatures would be measured periodically throughout the facility to provide comfortable and safe temperature levels and blankets and closing the curtains…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-17 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure assessments (Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool)) accurately reflected resident status for 6 of 22 residents reviewed (Residents #6, #70, #82, #101, #104, and #108). Specifically, cognitive assessments (Brief Interview for Mental Status (a cognitive screening tool)) were documented as not assessed without evidence the interview could not be completed, and required sections of the assessment were left incomplete.The findings include:Review of Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) records on 03/16/2026 at 4:30 PM revealed: Resident #6 had a quarterly assessment dated [DATE] which documented the Brief Interview for Mental Status was not assessed. Resident #70 had an annual assessment dated [DATE] which documented the Brief Interview for Mental Status was not assessed. Resident #82 had quarterly assessments dated 12/10/2025 and 01/13/2026 which documented the Brief Interview for Mental Status was not assessed.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure the infection prevention and control program was implemented to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for two (2) of two (2) residents reviewed (Resident #5 and Resident #96). Specifically, Resident #5 was provided a meal tray stored in a cart with soiled trays, creating a risk for cross-contamination and potential transmission of pathogens, and Resident #96 who was on enhanced barrier precautions (an infection control strategy using gloves and gowns during high-contact resident care to reduce the spread of infection) received high-contact care without appropriate personal protective equipment. In addition, the facility did not ensure staff handled soiled linens in a manner to prevent the spread of infection, as staff sorted soiled linens wearing cloth aprons which increased the risk of contamination.The findings include:The facility policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions last reviewed February…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-17 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not properly maintain the nurse call system for one (1) of three (3) resident use floors (Second (2nd) floor). Specifically, a central station call system panel was not present and the audible component for the call system was not working properly. The findings include:Record review on 03/10/2026 at 12:30 PM, revealed the facility electrical equipment policy dated 12/18/2024, documented: 1. Patient Care Related Electrical Equipment (PCREE) shall be tested before being put into service for the first (1st) time and after any repair or modification that might have compromised electrical safety. 3. Testing and maintenance of the Patient Care Related Electrical Equipment will be based on manufacturer's service manual recommendations but tested annually at a minimum. 4. Documentation including a record of Patient Care Related Electrical Equipment tests, repairs and modifications, whether performed by facility staff or an outside vendor, will be maintained at the facility.When observed on 03/09/2026 at 10:00 AM there…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-17 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility did not provide services to meet professional standards of quality for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed (Resident #18) for nutrition, for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed (Resident #7) for drugs and medications, and for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed (Resident #14) for respiratory care. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that weights (Resident #18) and vital signs (blood pressure and heart rate) (Resident #7) were obtained per the physician's orders and/or had documented results (numerical values). In addition, Resident #14 was receiving continuous oxygen without physicians orders. The findings are:The facility policy Charting and Documentation dated January 2020 documented all services provided to a resident shall be documented in the resident's medical record and should include the date, time, and assessment data collected. The facility policy Weight Management dated March 2024 documented a resident's weight shall…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-01-31 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespreadAdminister 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey and complaints investigations 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, facility did not ensure it was administered in a manner that enabled it to use it's resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The facility must operate and provide services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards and principles that apply to professionals providing services in such a facility. The facility must have a governing body, or designated persons functioning as a governing body, that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies regarding the management and operation of the facility; and the governing body is responsible and accountable for the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement program. Specifically, the administration…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — widespreadMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/22/2025 to 01/31/2025, for three (first, second, and third floors) of three resident use floors the facility did not properly maintain the nurse call system. Specifically, central nurse call system panels were not present or functioning properly, the audible component for the call system was not working properly, and there was no documented testing of nurse call devices on the first floor. The findings are: The facility electrical equipment policy dated 12/18/2024, documented: 1. Patient Care Related Electrical Equipment (PCREE) shall be tested before being put into service for the first time and after any repair or modification that might have compromised electrical safety. 3. Testing and maintenance of the PCREE will be based on the manufacturer's service manual recommendations but tested annually at a minimum. 4. Documentation including a record of PCREE tests, repairs and modifications, whether…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-31 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey and complaint investigations (NY00370078, NY00362904 and NY00349354) from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, the facility did not ensure that thorough and prompt efforts were made to resolve grievances for two (Residents #88 and #350) of 27 residents reviewed. Specially, Resident #88's grievances were not thoroughly investigated and there was no follow-up when the resident voiced dissatisfaction with the facility's resolution to one of their grievances. For Resident #350, there was no evidence a thorough investigation was completed to determine if abuse, neglect, or mistreatment had been ruled out, and the facility did not follow-up with the residents regarding grievance resolution. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Grievances, dated 07/02/2024, included a resident and/or representative may file a grievance concerning their treatment, medical care, the behavior of other resident(s) or staff members(s), missing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-31 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey and complaint investigations (#NY00357725, #NY00349354) from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, for three (Residents #28, #48, #65) of nine residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure that residents who were dependent on staff for assistance received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene. Specifically Resident #28 did not receive incontinence care timely and did not receive showers and hair washing for an extended period of time. Resident #48 did not receive incontinence care timely. Resident #65 was not assisted to the bathroom by staff for an extended period resulting in being incontinent. This is evidenced by the following: Review of the facility policy Activities of Daily Living Care and Support dated 03/13/2024 included that Activities of Daily Living Care will be provided for residents who are unable to carry them out independently, with the consent of the resident and 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-31 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (NY00363528) from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, the facility did not ensure that residents received care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two (Residents #12 and #350) of 27 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #350 did not receive wound care treatments per physician orders on multiple occasions and Resident #12's ordered x-ray was not performed until 15 days after it was ordered. This is evidenced by the following: 1. Resident #350 had diagnoses that included diabetes, peripheral vascular disease (a condition where arteries and/or veins become narrowed or blocked, reducing blood flow to the limbs), and chronic venous ulcers (wounds caused by reduced blood flow in the limbs). The Minimum Data Set Resident assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #350 was cognitively intact. Review of the physician orders as of 01/09/2025 revealed 12 different wounds on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025-01/31/2025, the facility did not ensure an Infection Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections was maintained for 3 (Residents' #65, #350 and #351) of 24 residents reviewed. Specifically, appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was not worn by nursing staff in residents' room that were identified by the facility as requiring Enhanced Barrier Precautions while preforming high contact care to residents. Additionally, observations of multiple facility staff who had declined the influenza vaccine were not wearing face masks while in resident care areas during the current influenza season as determined by the Department of Health. The facility policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions dated 05/30/2024, documented Enhanced Barrier Precautions would be initiated 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-31 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025 for one (Resident #65) of four residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure residents received the necessary care, treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote the healing of a pressure ulcer, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing (unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates they were unavoidable). Specifically, Resident #65 who preferred to spend most of their time in bed, was not assisted with toileting, and was left incontinent of urine for multiple hours. Resident #65 developed a pressure ulcer to their right buttock and had not received treatments to the area for several days. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy, Skin and Pressure Injury Prevention, dated 06/27/2024 included staff are to inspect the skin when performing or assisting with personal care or activities of daily…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, for two (Residents #20 and #351) of two residents reviewed, the facility did not provide appropriate treatment and care, based upon current standards of practice and the residents' comprehensive assessment and care plan to prevent urinary tract infections to the extent possible. Specifically, Resident #20 had a history of urinary tract infections and was observed with their indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag (including the drainage port and catheter tubing) lying uncovered (no barrier) on a soiled chair and above the level of the bladder. Resident #351's indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag was observed on the ground without a barrier and above the level of the bladder on multiple occasions. Additionally Resident #20 had a physician order for a urinalysis that was not obtained timely. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Catheter Guidelines;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, the facility did not ensure all drugs and biologicals were properly stored in accordance with State and Federal Laws for one (second-floor north medication cart) of two medication carts and one (third-floor medication room) of two medication rooms reviewed. Specifically, the second-floor north medication cart contained controlled medications (medications such as narcotics and opioids that have the potential for abuse and addiction) that were not in a permanently affixed compartment per the regulations and the third-floor medication room contained multiple undated/unlabeled medications. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Controlled Substance Management dated August 2022, included the proper storage of controlled drugs was in a double door, double locked, double keyed, steel, wall mounted drug cabinet during non-med pass times and in locked controlled drug compartment of medication cart during med pass times. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-31 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025, the facility did not ensure each resident was educated and offered the influenza and/or the pneumococcal immunizations (vaccine) for three (Resident #12, #53, #351) of five residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility was unable to provide evidence the residents or their representatives had been provided educational material and offered, received or declined the pneumococcal and/or influenza immunizations. The facility policies Infection Control-Influenza Vaccine dated 08/22/2024 and the Pneumococcal Vaccine dated 11/27/2024 included all residents and/or their resident representative will be offered and provided the influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. Residents have the opportunity to refuse the vaccine(s). A resident's refusal of the vaccine(s) shall be documented on the informed consent for influenza vaccine and pneumococcal vaccine and placed in the resident's medical record and will…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-02 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (NY00342658), for one (Resident #12) of two residents reviewed for drugs and medication, the facility did not provide services to meet professional standards of quality. Specifically, nursing staff did not ensure medications were consumed by the resident and were left unattended with the resident in a common area. This was evidenced by the following. Review of the facility policy Medication Administration Review, dated August 2019, documented that Licensed Nurses must ensure that all medications are administered and documented. Resident #12 had diagnoses that included multiple sclerosis (a disease that affects the central nervous system), epilepsy (a brain condition that causes seizures), and hypertension (high blood pressure). The Minimum Data Set Resident Assessment, dated 10/13/2024, documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition and had impaired vision and trouble concentrating. Review of Resident #12 current Comprehensive Care Plan did not include that the resident's had been…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-02 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (NY00320939), for three (Residents #1, #2 and #3) of three residents reviewed the facility did not ensure a written notice of the facility's bed hold policy was provided to the residents or their representatives at the time of transfer to the hospital, or for emergency transfers, within 24 hours. Specifically, the facility could not provide evidence that any of the residents or their representatives were given written information regarding their bed hold policy in allowing the residents to return to the facility following a hospital discharge at the time of their transfer. This was evidenced by the following: 1. Resident #2 had diagnoses that included bacteremia, major depressive disorder, and anemia. The Minimum Data Set Resident Assessment, dated 5/21/24, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #2's electronic medical record revealed the resident was transferred to the hospital several few weeks ago. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (Complaint #NY00314833), for two (Resident #11 and Resident #12) of three residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living, the facility did not ensure that a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene. Specifically, Resident #11 did not receive assistance with shaving and washing their hair. Resident #12 did not receive assistance with shaving and nail care. This is evidenced by the following: Review of the facility policy Activities of Daily Living Care and Support, dated 3/13/24, documented that the facility would provide residents with activities of daily living care and support in accordance with current standards of practice, State and Federal regulations, and were based on the resident's assessed needs, personal preferences, and goals of care. Additionally, nail care should be provided as needed, and facial hair…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (Complaint # NY00314833) it was determined that for one (Resident #12), of three residents reviewed for accidents the facility did not ensure that each resident received the appropriate assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, Resident #12 required the use of a Hoyer lift ( a mechanical lift device) for safe transfers. During an observation two staff members transferred the resident without using a mechanical lift. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Activities of Daily Living Care and Support revised on 3/13/24, documented that the facility shall provide residents with Activity of Daily Living care and support in accordance with current standards of practice, State and Federal regulations, and are based on the resident's assessed needs, personal preference, and goals of care. Review of the facility policy Care Plans - Comprehensive, dated October 2019 revealed the care plans are used to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-01-11 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey completed 1/11/23, it was determined that for three (first, second and third floors) of three resident use floors, the facility did not provide a safe, functional, and sanitary environment for residents, staff, and the public. Specifically, unapproved chemical treatment of the domestic hot water system was occurring without approval of the New York State Department of Health. The findings are: Record review on 1/5/23 at 11:50 a.m. revealed a facility document titled 'environmental assessment of water systems in health care settings' dated 1/25/22 included supplemental disinfection using a 50/50 chlorine sodium hypochlorite solution in the domestic hot water supply. Observations during the initial tour of the facility on 1/4/23 included hot water was provided throughout the facility on all three floors including the main kitchen, at sinks, and in shower rooms. Observations on 1/6/23 at 9:35 a.m. included a 15-gallon container with a label that read: Stainex laundry brightener. Further…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that for two (2nd floor and 3rd floor) of two units reviewed for medication storage, the facility did not have a consistent system to account for the receipt, usage, disposition, and reconciliation of all controlled medications (narcotics). Specifically, the controlled medications count sheets and the signatures of staff members for each shift-to-shift count were not consistently completed to validate the correct controlled substance count was done and was accurate. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Narcotic Count, dated August 2018, documented that the oncoming and outgoing nurses assigned to the medication cart are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the controlled drug count. The policy also included that two nurses would count the number of individual controlled drugs by looking at each medication and verify that the number of individual controlled drugs matched the number on inventory. The policy also included that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-01-11 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigations (#NY00297231 and #NY00307562), completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that the facility did not follow the meal menus to ensure the nutritional needs of the residents. Specifically, residents did not receive menu items as listed on their meal tickets. The findings are: During an interview on 1/5/23 at 9:17 a.m., Resident #15 stated that when they received their meals, the food on their plate did not always match the food ticket. Resident #15 had a copy of the facility's meal menu and stated this was the first time they had gotten one since they were admitted (11/10/22) to the facility. While reviewing the menu, Resident #15 stated that for breakfast, they received boiled eggs instead of scrambled eggs and a donut instead of a muffin. Resident #15 stated that when they told staff that they did not have everything on their plate, the staff member said they will get something but did not come back. Observation of tray line for the lunch meal on 1/6/23 from…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 1/11/23, it was determined for one (Resident #54) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility did not ensure a person-centered Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) was developed for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs. Specifically, a CCP was not developed for use of psychotropic medications that included targeted symptoms, measurable goals, and person-centered nonpharmacological interventions. The finding is: Resident #54 had diagnoses that included anxiety disorder, depression and recent hip fracture. The Minimum Data Set (MDS)assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident was moderately impaired of cognitive function and had received anti-anxiety and anti-depressant medications on 6-7 days respectfully in the look back period. The PHQ-9 test (a screening done by health care staff to assess for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-11 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications, the facility did not ensure the services provided or arranged by the facility as outlined in the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) met professional standards of quality. Specifically, Resident #1 had two orders for the same medication, dosage, and frequency both active at the same time. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of left tibia fracture, fibromyalgia (widespread muscle pain), and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 11/1/22, included that Resident #1 was cognitively intact, and had received an antianxiety medication in the previous seven days. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan revealed that Resident #1 was on psychotropic medications (a group of medications used to treat a person's mental state) for diagnoses of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that for one (Resident #15) of nine residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs), the facility did not ensure that ADL care was provided for dependent residents. Specifically, Resident #15's facial hair was not shaved. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of end-stage renal disease (requiring hemodialysis), gout, and diabetes. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 11/27/22, included that the resident was cognitively intact and required set-up help and supervision of one-staff member with bathing. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) initiated 12/28/22, and the current [NAME] (care plan used by the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) for daily care) revealed that Resident #15 required set-up help and/or supervision with bathing, and staff assistance with providing cleaning products, towels 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-11 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducting during the Recertification Survey, completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that for one (Resident #15) of six residents reviewed for nutrition, the facility did not ensure that the resident's daily fluid intake was monitored to ensure their needs as ordered by the physician were met. Specifically, the physician ordered fluid restriction was not being consistently documented or monitored. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy, Fluid Restrictions, dated last revised in December 2019, included that the physician order should include the number of milliliters (mLs) of fluids permitted for each day, and nursing fluids are divided into medications passes and the individual's daily routine. The policy stated that nursing is responsible for recording the intake and output of fluids for each shift. The policy included that the Registered Dietician (RD) would calculate and distribute the fluid pattern for the total fluid allowance to 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that for one (2 North hallway) of two medication carts reviewed, the facility did not ensure that all drugs and biologicals were properly labeled and stored in accordance with State and Federal laws. Specifically, multiple medications were found pre-poured, unlabeled and undated for future medication administration. Additionally, a large bottle of Tylenol was on top of a medication cart and unsupervised for an extended length of time. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Medication Administration, dated December 2019, documented that medications may not be prepared in advance and must be administered within one hour their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified. The facility policy Medication Storage, dated January 2019, documented that medication should be stored in their original, labeled containers as received from the pharmacy. 1. During an observation on 1/9/23 at 2:41 p.m., on 2nd floor resident unit there were multiple pre-poured…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-11 · tag F0836 — isolatedEnsure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 1/11/23, it was determined that the facility did not ensure compliance with all applicable State codes. Specifically, the facility was not in compliance with section 915 of the 2015 edition of the International Fire Code as adopted by New York State, which requires the use of carbon monoxide detection in a building that has fuel-burning appliances. The findings are: 1. Observations on 1/5/23 at 1:42 p.m. included three natural gas-powered dryers located in the first-floor laundry room, and there were no carbon monoxide detectors within or in the vicinity of the laundry area. 2. In an interview on 1/5/23 at 2:06 p.m. the Director of Maintenance stated there was a carbon monoxide detector in the laundry room behind the washers but that it was taken out about a week ago as the batteries needed to be replaced. 3. On 1/5/23 at 2:34 p.m. it was observed that a carbon monoxide detector was plugged into an outlet next to the meat slicer in the kitchen and was marked with an install date of 11/3/20.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-09 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during a Recertification Survey, completed on 6/9/21, it was determined that for nine (Residents #7, #14, #27, #63, #67, #70, #76, #82 and Resident A) of ten residents reviewed, the facility did not provide food and drink that was palatable, attractive and at a safe and appetizing temperature. Specifically, the issues involved food that was unpalatable, not served at preferable temperatures and was unattractive related to frequently being served meals in Styrofoam (disposable dishware). This is evidenced by, but not limited to, the following: 1.Resident A has diagnoses including hypertension, diabetes mellitus and arthritis. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/20/21, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. During an interview on 6/3/21 at 12:25 p.m., Resident A said they hate the Styrofoam plates that are used all the time and the food is always cold. 2.Resident #82 has diagnoses including anemia, heart failure and hypertension. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-09 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, completed on 6/9/21, for one (Resident #56) of two residents reviewed, the facility did not allow the resident to make choices about aspects of their life that were significant to them. Specifically, the resident did not receive showers as per their stated preferences. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #56 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including amputation of the left leg, morbid obesity, and a recent urinary tract infection. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 5/4/21, revealed that the resident had moderately impaired cognition, required extensive assistance to total dependence of two staff members for personal hygiene and bathing and had stated that being able to choose their bathing routine was very important to them. The February 2020 facility policy, Resident Rights, directs staff to ensure that residents are guaranteed basic rights that include self-determination. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-09 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation ,interview and record review conducted the Recertification Survey and complaint investigations ( #NY00273585 and #NY00272080), completed on 6/9/21, it was determined that for two (Residents #56 and #58) of six residents reviewed, the facility did not thoroughly investigate alleged violations of potential abuse neglect or mistreatment. Specifically, bruises of unknown origin for Resident #56 and a grievance by Resident #58 regarding lack of care were not thoroughly investigated to rule out abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Abuse, dated February 2019, included allegations of suspected abuse, neglect, mistreatment, injury of unknown origin or misappropriation of property shall be promptly and thoroughly investigated by facility management. The summary must take into account an objective overview of the facts and a reason or basis for decision, to substantiate or not substantiate the allegation. The facility policy Resident Rights, dated February 2020 included employees shall treat all residents with kindness,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (#NY200273585), completed on 6/9/21, the facility did not ensure that two of five residents reviewed received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal hygiene. Specifically, Resident #58 was not provided a meal tray and was not given showers as requested and Resident #67 lacked nail care. This is evidenced by the following: 1.Resident # 58 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including COVID-19, critical illness myopathy (muscle disease), and diabetes. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 5/10/21, included the resident was cognitively intact, required extensive assistance of two staff for bathing, assist of one staff for eating and received the majority of their calories via a feeding tube. The admission MDS Assessment, dated 3/17/21, included that choice of bathing was very important to the resident. The Comprehensive Care Plan included that Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey, completed on 6/9/21, it was determined that for two of three residents reviewed the facility did not ensure that each resident received adequate supervision and assistance to prevent accidents. Specifically, Resident #27 did not receive supervision at meals related to aspiration precautions and Resident #70 did not receive assistance with ambulation and transfers to minimize risk for falls. This was evidenced by: Review of the facility policy Aspiration Precautions, dated February 2019, revealed staff were to sit the resident upright or as close as possible for any intake and must be supervised for all intake of liquid and solids. 1.Resident #27 had diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, and Alzheimer's disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/24/21, revealed the resident was moderately impaired cognitively, and required supervision with eating. In a dietary note, 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 reviews during the Recertification Survey, completed on 6/9/21, it was determined that for one (Resident #49) of one resident reviewed for bowel and bladder incontinence, the facility did not ensure that the resident received the treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the resident's comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's choice in order to maintain continence and restore bowel function to the extent possible. Specifically, the facility did not develop and implement a person-centered care plan with measurable goals and interventions to effectively restore and manage the resident's bowel function. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #49 has diagnoses including a femur fracture, heart failure, and hypertension. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 4/28/21, included that the resident is cognitively intact, was incontinent of bowls frequently and required total dependance on staff for toileting Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-09 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, completed on 6/9/21, it was determined for one (Resident #76) of two residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure that dialysis services provided were consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences. Specifically, facility staff did not notify the medical team to initiate new dialysis orders regarding a new medication and a fluid restriction. Additionally, there was no Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP), including person centered goals, interventions, and preferences, for the resident's dialysis needs. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #76 had diagnoses including end stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis three times a week and an arteriovenous fistula (connection between an artery and a vein used for the dialysis treatments). A Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 5/18/21, included the resident was cognitively intact and was on a therapeutic diet. Current physician orders included to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025 for one (Resident #10) of two residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure that individual financial records were provided to the residents through quarterly statements. Specifically, neither Resident #10 nor their identified resident representative were provided with any quarterly personal fund statements over an extended period of time. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Resident Funds Account last reviewed August 2020 included the facility will provide on request, and at least quarterly to the resident or the resident's designated or legal representative, a statement showing the account balance including funds deposited and withdrawn and interest accrued. 1. Resident #10 had diagnoses that included paranoid schizophrenia, high blood pressure, and diabetes. The Minimum Data Set Resident Assessment completed 12/17/2024 documented the resident was cognitively intact. During an interview on 01/22/2025 at 9:11 AM Resident #10 stated they did…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2025-01-31 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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, interviews, and record review conducted during the Extended Recertification Survey from 01/21/2025 to 01/31/2025 for three (Residents #20, #76, and #248) of three residents reviewed the facility did not ensure that a copy of resident's transfer and/or discharge notices were sent to a representative of the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #20 had diagnoses that included urinary retention (unable to empty the bladder), benign prostatic hyperplasia (enlargement of the prostate), and chronic kidney disease. A review of the electronic health record revealed Resident #20 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE], 11/14/2024, 12/02/2024, 12/19/2024, and 12/24/2024. Resident #76 had diagnoses that included bilateral below the knee amputations, history of deep vein thrombosis (blood clot), and anxiety. A review of the electronic health record revealed Resident #76 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. Resident #248 had diagnoses including cerebral…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-01-11 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
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 the Recertification Survey completed on 1/11/23, it was determined the facility did not provide one (Resident #29) of one resident reviewed for personal funds, with their individual financial record through quarterly statements. Specifically, Resident #29 was not provided with their personal fund statement on a quarterly basis per their preference or on request. Findings include: The facility policy, Resident Account Funds, dated 8/20/20 documented that each resident or the resident's designated or legal representative will be provided upon request, and at least quarterly a statement of their personal funds. The statement should include the account balance, funds deposited and withdrawn and interest accrued. Resident #29 was admitted on [DATE] and had diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), failure to thrive, and major depressive disorder. The 1/8/23 Minimum Data Set Assessment documented the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #29'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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$117,878 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $117,878 — penalty dated 2025-01-31
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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
The other 35 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABRAMCHIK, AMIR | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 95% | since 11/01/2014 |
| ABRAMCHIK, DEBORAH | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 5% | since 11/26/2014 |
| GOLDMAN, NATHAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| HENDRIX, HEIDI | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| LANTZITSKY, AHARON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| KLEIN, YAAKOV | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/18/2025 |
| PULCINO, TIFFANY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/23/2025 |
| HAGLER, DARYL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2014 |
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.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 77% 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 $1.2M 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
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.
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 335564. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-01-31, 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.