Cooperstown Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing
128 Phoenix Mills Cross Road, Cooperstown, NY 13326 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 174 certified beds · (607) 544-2600 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2024
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (64%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 2 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 | 18.2% | 14.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 9.1% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.1% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 21.7% | 19.5% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 2.5% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.8% | 12.5% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.1% | 13.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.6% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 13.8% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.9% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.6% | 13.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.9% | 78.8% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.9% | 20.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.2% | 9.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.37 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.54 | 1.36 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
39.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 222 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.2% 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 116 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 39.9%CMS range 33.8–46.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.9%CMS range 8.7–14.7 | 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 | 61.2% | 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 | 58.6% | 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 | 62.9% | 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 | 98.7% | 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 | 96.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 2.0% | 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 | 7.0%CMS range 4.6–10.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.28 | 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 174 beds and averages 170.4 residents a day — about 98% 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 2.93 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.55 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were labelled and stored in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, (a.) opened medications had no open and/or expiration dates; (b.) controlled substances were not kept secured in a double locked cabinet; (c.) expired medications were present; and (d.) medications were left on top of medication cart unattended. This was evident for 3 out of 10 medication carts reviewed, and for 2 out of 5 medication storage rooms reviewed. This is evidenced by: The facility's Medication Administration Policy and Procedure, effective 12/2019 documented, the expiration date on the medication label must be checked prior to administering. When opening a multi-dose container, the date should be recorded on the container. During administration of medications, the medication cart would be kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse or aide. No…
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 before2024-05-02 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the main kitchen and 7 of 10 kitchenettes. Specifically, food contact equipment was not being sanitized, thermometers were not calibrated, and surfaces were not clean. This is evidenced by: During observations in the main kitchen on 4/22/2024 at 6:48 PM: • The concentration of quaternary ammonium compound used in the final, sanitizing rinse sink of the 3-compartment sink was 0 parts per million when measured at 70 degrees Fahrenheit, in accordance with the testing kit directions; food contact equipment was being washed during this observation. • The label directions on the quaternary ammonium compound concentrate instruct that the dilution range is to be between 200 and 400 parts per million. • Two food temperature thermometers were found not in calibration at 24 degrees Fahrenheit and 52…
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 before2024-05-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated survey (Case # NY00318691), the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for all residents in the facility. Specifically, call lights were not answered timely to meet the needs of residents, with multiple residents stating there were long waits for call lights, and there were 34 falls documented for the month of April 2024. This is evidenced by: The Facility Assessment, last updated 3/01/2024, documented the facility capacity was 174 residents with an average daily census range of 163-170 residents. The following two units were designated for extra staffing: [NAME]: 30 designated short term rehab beds, and Serenity Place: 35 designated beds for the dementia population on a secure unit. Staffing was based on acuity and resident needs. Record review revealed the following from 6/13/2023-…
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 · D2024-05-02 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 record review and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated survey (Case #NY00324855), the facility did not ensure the resident's right to be free from neglect for 1 (Resident #45) of 6 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. Specifically, on 9/19/2023, Certified Nurse Aide #4 did not use two staff for bed mobility as documented in Resident #45's Comprehensive Care Plan while providing care to the resident. Resident #45 rolled out of bed onto the floor. This is evidenced by: Resident #45 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of hypertensive heart disease (a long-term condition that develops over many years in people who have high blood pressure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (a chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs), and morbid (severe) obesity. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 4/01/2024, documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition, could usually understand others and be understood. The Policy 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 · D2024-05-02 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during a recertification and abbreviated survey (Case # NY00324855), the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 resident (Resident #45) of 6 residents reviewed for abuse, neglect, and mistreatment. Specifically, for Resident #45, Certified Nurse Aide #4 did not use two…
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 · D2024-05-02 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during a recertification and abbreviated survey (Case # NY00324038), the facility did not ensure residents who were hospitalized or on therapeutic leave were allowed to return to the facility for skilled nursing or nursing facility care or services for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #165). Specifically, Resident #165 was sent to the hospital on 9/12/2023 for evaluation for behaviors. The resident was medically cleared and discharged from the emergency department. The facility refused to accept the transfer back to the facility. This is evidenced by: The facility policy and procedure titled, Discharge-Transfer/Discharge Process, dated 12/2019, documented if a resident was transferred to the hospital because the facility was unable to safely manage the resident's care at the time of transfer, the facility was expected to readmit the resident once the hospital had determined it was safe for them to return to the facility. Resident #165 was admitted with 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 · D2023-12-27 · tag F0659 — isolatedProvide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00275660), the facility did not ensure the services provided or arranged by the facility, as outlined by the comprehensive care plan, were provided by qualified persons in accordance with each resident's written plan of care for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 residents reviewed for services provided by qualified persons. Specifically, Resident #1's nephrostomy tubes (a tube that lets urine drain from the kidney through an opening in the skin on the back into a drainage bag) were flushed by Licensed Practical Nurses who were not qualified to do so within their scope of practice . This was evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Nephrostomy Tube, dated 5/2019, documented the care of a resident with a nephrostomy tube was to only be performed by a Licensed Nurse. Resident #1 Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of spinal bifida (birth defect in which a developing baby's spinal cord fails to develop properly),…
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 · D2023-12-27 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews during an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00275660), the facility did not ensure that licensed nurses have the specific competencies and skill sets necessary to care for residents' needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 residents reviewed for nursing competencies and skill sets necessary to care for residents' needs. Specifically, for Resident # 1 who had nephrostomy tubes (a tube that lets urine drain from the kidney through an opening in the skin on the back into a drainage bag) to drain each kidney, the facility was unable to provide nursing competencies that documented Registered Nurses had the skills to flush nephrostomy tubes. This was evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Competencies, dated 1/18/2023, documented facility personnel were to be competent in specific duties and tasks. Training and/or competency validations were completed on hire and annually. Resident #1 Resident #1 was admitted…
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 · E2022-03-08 · 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 observation and staff interview during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not provide effective housekeeping and maintenance services. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that on four (4) of 4 resident units observed, the walls, ceilings, and floors were clean and/or in good repair. This is evidenced as follows: During observations on 03/04/2022 at 10:05 AM, the floor linoleum was separating forming a gap revealing the subfloor in resident rooms #A221, #A227, #A255, #A279, #B136, #D103, #D130, #D179, #D259, and Salon/Barber room #C208A. The floor was soiled with ground-in dirt in resident rooms #A255, #B102, and #D130 and the corridors next to walls on the [NAME] Glen unit, Country Meadows unit, and [NAME] unit. The carpeted wainscoting below the handrails were soiled on the Mountain Ridge unit, Rolling Hills unit, and Country Meadows unit. The washer/dryer closet were heavily soiled with lint on the [NAME] Glen unit, Rolling Hills, unit, and Gardenia Way…
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 before2022-03-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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
Based on observations, record review and interview, during a recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure that comprehensive person-centered care plans (CCP) were developed and implemented for each resident consistent with the resident rights set forth that include measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for five (5) (Resident #'s 57, 85, 89, 367 and #512) of thirty three (33) residents reviewed. Specifically, for Resident #57, the facility did not ensure a care plan was developed to address the resident's frequent diarrhea; for Resident #85, did not ensure a care plan was developed for the resident's use of anticoagulant therapy and increased risks of bleeding; for Resident #89, the facility did not ensure a care plan was developed to address the resident's anxiety and associated behaviors or the use of antianxiety and antidepressant medications; for Resident #367, did not ensure care plans were developed to address 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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-08 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure provision of sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident throughout the facility. Specifically, the facility did not ensure the desired staffing levels for Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs), as documented in the Facility Assessment, were met 9 of 9 calendar days from 2/27/2022 to 3/7/2022 and Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), as documented in the Facility Assessment, were met for 9 out of 9 calendar days from 2/27/2022 to 3/7/2022. This is evidenced by: The Facility assessment dated [DATE]; rev. 03/1/2022 documented Staffing Plan; See Attached. On 3/7/2022 at 2:40 PM, the Administrator provided an undated document and stated the document was the current Facility Assessment Staffing Plan. 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 · E2022-03-08 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure that there were no more than 14 hours between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day, except, when a nourishing snack was served at bedtime, up to 16 hours may elapse between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day if a resident group agrees to this meal span. Specifically, the facility did not ensure a nourishing bedtime snack was provided when there was a greater than 14-hour time span between the evening meal and breakfast. This was evidenced by: A review of the document titled, Mealtimes undated, documented the meal times were approximate to when the trays/meals would arrive in the designated dining areas: Breakfast: Cart Country Meadows (CM) Left #1: 7:40 AM Cart CM Right #2: 7:48 AM Cart [NAME] (WB) Left #3: 7:56 AM Cart WB Right #4: 8:04 AM Cart Mountain Ridge (MR) Left #9: 8:12 AM Cart MR Right #10: 8:20 AM Cart Rolling…
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 before2022-03-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, manufacturer's directions review, and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The safe and sanitary operation of a professional kitchen is to include particular methods of operation. Specifically, the automatic dishwashing machine (dish machine) was not operating within the manufacturer's specifications, the concentration of chemical sanitizing rinse (QAC) utilized in the three-compartment sink was less than that required by the manufacturer, and equipment and serving areas (9 of 9 kitchenettes) required cleaning or equipment repairs. This is evidenced as follows: The kitchen and unit kitchenettes were inspected on 02/28/2022 at 11:16 AM. During the inspection of the kitchen, the concentration of QAC used in the sanitizing rinse sink of the 3-compartment sink was found to be 150 ppm when measured at 73 degrees Fahrenheit (F); the manufacturer's label…
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 · E2022-03-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure medical records on each resident were complete and accurately documented for 6 (Residents #s 36,42,57,104,113, and 512) of 33 residents reviewed. Specifically, for Resident #36 the facility did not ensure documentation of the resident's condition or follow-up upon return from the emergency room, for Resident #42 the facility did not ensure documentation for the resident's transfer out of bed (oob) was accurately reflected when the resident did not get oob; for Resident #57, the facility did not ensure documentation reflected the resident's ongoing reports of diarrhea or the need for an antidiarrheal being administered on four out of eight days in March 2022, for Resident #104, the facility did not ensure the administration of narcotic pain medication that was administered on an as needed basis (PRN) to the resident who reported pain level of 7 out of 10 was consistently documented, for Resident #113, the facility did not ensure Certified Nurse Aides…
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 before2022-03-08 · 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 observation, record review and interviews during a recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases, infections and COVID-19. Specifically, for 1 (Serenity Place) of 5 units, the facility did not ensure contact and droplet precautions were maintained when Resident #55, who tested positive for COVID-19, was not socially distanced from residents who did not test positive for COVID-19 and for Resident #42, the facility did not ensure infection control practices were maintained during the disposal of soiled linen following incontinence care. Finding #1: Resident #55 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of dementia, hypertensive heart disease, and mild intermittent asthma. The Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment tool) dated 10/9/21, documented the resident had severely impaired cognition, could usually understand others and could make self…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-03-08 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not maintain a pest-free environment and an effective pest control program. Specifically, the facility did not maintain an adequate pest control program as evidenced by multiple sightings of rodent droppings. This is evidenced as follows: During observations on 02/28/2022 at 11:16 AM, rodent droppings were found in the cabinets below the tray line counters in the Oak Creek and [NAME] Creek kitchenette on the [NAME] pod, the Gardenia Court kitchenette on the Country Meadows pod, the [NAME] Glen kitchenette on the Rolling Hills pod, and the Serenity Place pod main kitchenette. Record review of the facility pest-control sighting logs (dated from April 2021 through February 2022) on 02/28/2022 documented staff last reported rodent activity on the [NAME] pod in May 2021 but not at any other time since. Staff did not report evidence of rodent activity on the Country Meadows pod,…
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 · D2022-03-08 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents and/or their designated representative were fully informed of their right to an expedited review of a service termination. Specifically, residents who received Medicare Part A services did not receive timely notification (2-day notification) of the termination of services with the Notice to Medicare Non-coverage, Form CMS-10123-NOMNIC (NOMNIC). This was evident for two (2) out of three (3) sampled residents reviewed for Beneficiary Protection Notification (residents #363 and #63). This is evidenced as follows: During the medical record review for Resident #363 on 03/02/2022, it was revealed that the resident #363 last received covered services on 11/13/2021 and was provided the NOMNC to inform the resident of their right to an expedited review of a service termination on 11/12/2021, one day prior to the termination of services. During the medical record review for Resident #63 on 03/02/2022, it was revealed that the Resident #363 last received covered…
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 · D2022-03-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not provide needed care or services resulting in an actual or potential decline in one or more residents' physical, mental, and/or psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #113) of 2 residents reviewed for bowel and bladder. Specifically, for Resident #113, who received daily medications to treat constipation, the facility did not ensure the daily medications to treat constipation were effective, did not ensure their standard of practice for Bowel Management was followed and did not ensure that the medication administration record's alert tab for a resident not having a BM (bowel movement) for 3 days was utilized when the resident did not have a bowel movement for a 12 day period from 12/25/2021 through 1/5/2022. This was evidenced by: The Policy & Procedure (P&P) titled Bowel Management dated 5/2019, documented the Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) was to document the resident's bowel…
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 · D2022-03-08 · 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 observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey conducted from 2/28/2022 to 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure each resident maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible or resident preferences indicated otherwise for 1 (Resident #113) of 7 residents reviewed for nutrition. Specifically, for Resident #113, the facility did not weigh and re-weigh the resident in accordance with professional standards and did not evaluate the need to develop and implement nutritional interventions when the resident had a significant weight loss of 81.2 lbs. in a 2-month period from 12/14/2021 to 2/13/2022. This was evidenced by: Resident #113 was admitted with diagnoses of Parkinson's disease, metabolic encephalopathy, and diabetes. The Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool) dated 12/14/2021, documented the resident had moderately impaired…
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 before2022-03-08 · 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 observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022 the facility did not ensure that residents who require dialysis receive such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #66) of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis. Specifically, for Resident #66, who receives dialysis, the facility did not ensure the comprehensive care plan (CCP) included interventions to provide direction for facility staff regarding the care of and monitoring for complications required for a resident receiving dialysis and did not ensure ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis facility regarding dialysis care and services. This was evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Dialysis Management dated 5/2019 documented, residents receiving hemodialysis treatments will be assessed and monitored to ensure quality of life and well-being. The nurse will obtain orders for monitoring of site, and interventions as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-08 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure the policy developed for the monthly medication regimen review (MRR) included time frames for the different steps in the process. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Medication Regimen Reviews (MRR) dated 3/20, did not document time frames when the facility staff would complete the steps in the MRR process. During an interview on 3/8/22 at 1:11 PM, the Director of Nursing stated there should be time frames for each step of the process and the policy would be fixed to address that. 10NYCRR415.18 (c)(2)
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-08 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey and an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00288001) dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for 1 (Resident #89) of 6 residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure Resident #89 received antiparkinsonian medication as prescribed by the physician. This is evidenced by: The Facility Policy titled, Medication-Reconciliation last revised on 1/2020, documented the Corporation (named) will accurately reconcile medications of newly admitted residents to contribute to the creation of an accurate master medication list. Medication reconciliation is a formal process of obtaining a complete and accurate list of each patient's current medications (including name, dosage, frequency, and route) and comparing the incoming admission, transfer and/or discharge medication orders to that list. Resident #89 Resident #89 was admitted with diagnoses of Parkinson's disease,…
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 · D2022-03-08 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey and an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00262847) dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure laboratory services were obtained or provided timely to meet resident needs for 1 (Resident #366) of 1 resident reviewed for laboratory services. Specifically, for Resident #366, the facility did not ensure a physician ordered urinalysis (UA- a test of the urine used to detect and manage a wide range of disorders, such as urinary tract infections) and Culture and Sensitivity (C&S- a laboratory test to detect and identify bacteria and yeast in the urine, which may be causing a urinary tract infection) dated 8/11/20 was obtained for over 7 days. This was evidenced by: Resident #366: Resident #366 was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses of heart failure, benign prostatic hyperplasia (condition that occurs when the prostate gland enlarges, potentially slowing or blocking the urine stream), and atrial fibrillation. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 7/24/20 documented the resident had…
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 · D2022-03-08 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure resident menus were followed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure a an alternative entree was consistently provided and did not consistently provide the menu as written on the resident's meal ticket. This is evidenced by: The facility's lunch menu for Week #1 on Wednesday menu documented; sliced pork, mashed sweet potatoes and green peas. The alternate lunch menu documented; hot turkey sandwich and wax beans. The facility's lunch menu for Week #1 on Thursday documented; Fish, garden rice and seasoned spinach. An alternate menu item was an egg salad sandwich and green beans. During an observation on 3/2/22 (Wednesday) at 12:54 PM, Resident #42's meal tray on their bedside table included ground meat, cauliflower, and a mashed orange colored food item on a plate. A printed meal ticket on the meal tray with Resident #42's name documented; sliced pork loin and diced carrots. During an observation on 3/3/22 at 12:47 PM, Resident #42 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-08 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview during the recertification survey dated 2/28/2022 through 3/8/2022, the facility did not ensure foods brought to residents by family and other visitors was stored and handled safely, and the policy regarding foods brought to residents is in accordance with adopted regulations. Specifically, the policy does not include a procedure to ensure all residents have the necessary assistance in accessing and consuming food brought to them by visitors, and outdated food brought to residents was not discarded. This is evidenced as follows: Review of the facility policy on 03/04/2022 for food brought in by visitors, documented that the policy requires staff to label with the resident name and date received on all foods brought to residents. The policy did not include a procedure to assist residents that are unable on their own to access and consume food brought to them by visitors. During an interview on 03/04/2022 at 3:21 PM, the Director of Nursing stated the policy will be updated to include a procedure to assist residents in accessing…
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 before2019-12-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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
Based on observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the development and implementation of comprehensive person-centered care plans (CCP), that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 6 (Resident #s 22, 29, 61, 85, 99, and #152) of 32 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that CCP's were developed to address Resident #22's contractures and range of motion (ROM) needs for the right upper extremity; Resident #29's respiratory issues that required treatment with nebulized medication and elevated ammonia levels that required medication to treat; Resident #85's internal defibrillator and episodes of syncope requiring hospitalization; Resident #99's contractures and ROM requirements; Resident #152's self administration of medication and did not ensure Resident #61's Pressure Ulcer care plan included individualized interventions to promote wound healing. This is evidenced by: The Policy 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 · Ecited before2019-12-20 · 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 observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections determined for 2 (Resident #'s 100 and 137) of 3 residents reviewed for dressing changes. Specifically, for Resident #100, the facility did not ensure that the outside of the multi-use bottles of ¼ inch iodoform packing strip and wound cleanser were clean, that gloves were changed when contaminated and that handwashing was performed between glove changes during a dressing change to the left hip; for Resident #137, the facility did not ensure gloves were changed when contaminated and handwashing performed between glove changes, that scissors were cleaned prior to use and sterile packages were opened correctly during a dressing change to the pressure ulcers of the 3rd and 4th toes on the left foot. This is evidenced by: Resident #100: The resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of unspecified open wound of left hip,…
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 · D2019-12-20 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that an accurate assessment was done by a qualified professional for 2 (Resident #'s 22 and 29) of 32 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. Specifically, the facility did not ensure section G of the Minimum Data Set (MDS -an assessment tool) accurately represented the functional status of Resident #22's right upper extremity (UE) for the time period of 6/23/16-10/10/19 and did not accurately represent the functional status of Resident 29's left foot and left hand. This was evidenced by: The facility policy and procedure MDS dated 5/2017 documented to follow the guidelines of the most current State-specified Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual correctly and effectively according to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The RAI consists of three basic components: The MDS, the Care Area Assessment process, and the RAI Utilization Guidelines. The utilization of the three…
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 · D2019-12-20 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview during a recertification survey, the facility did not develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care for 3 (Resident #'s 73, 75, and #82) of 13 residents reviewed for baseline care plans. Specifically, for Resident #'s 73, 75, and #82, the facility did not ensure the baseline care plans included minimum healthcare information related to Social Services. This is evidenced by: The policy and procedure titled Care Plans- Baseline, last revised 2/2019, documented the interdisciplinary team would review the healthcare practitioner's orders and implement a baseline care plan to meet the resident's immediate care needs including but not limited to: (A) Initial goals based on admission orders; (B) Physician orders; (C) Dietary orders; (D) Therapy services; (E) Social services; (F) PASARR recommendation, if applicable.…
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 · D2019-12-20 · 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
Based on observation, record review and staff interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for one (Resident #82) of two residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Specifically, for Resident #82, the facility did not ensure the resident, who was unable to carry out activities of daily living, received her weekly shower to maintain good personal hygiene. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled ADL- Bath (Shower) last revised 7/2019, documented it was the policy of the facility to shower resident, to cleanse and refresh the resident, observe the skin, and to provide increased circulation. Resident #82: The resident was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses of dementia, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 10/23/19 documented the resident had severely impaired cognition, could sometimes understand others and could sometimes make self…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-12-20 · 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, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible; and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for two (Resident #'s 96 and 152) of two residents reviewed for accidents. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that Resident #'s 96 and 152 were assessed for their ability to self-medicate prior to leaving medications in their rooms for them to self-administer resulting in Resident #152 missing 7 doses of Dulera HFA (a multidose inhaler used to control symptoms of obstructed airflow in the lungs). This is evidenced by: A Medication Self-Administration policy last reviewed 5/2019, documented that criteria must be met to determine if a resident is both mentally and physically capable of self-administering medication and to keep accurate documentation of these actions. Staff and the practitioner would assess each resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-12-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences, for one (Resident #152) of two reviewed for respiratory care. Specifically: the facility did not ensure that the residents Oxygen (O2) tank did not run dry resulting in the resident not receiving O2 therapy as prescribed. This is evidenced by: Resident #152: The resident was admitted with diagnoses of COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, recurrent pneumonia and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment tool) dated 9/19/19, assessed the resident as having intact cognitive skills for daily decision making. It documented that the resident understood and was understood by others and received oxygen therapy while a resident. A facility…
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 before2019-12-20 · 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 observation, record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents who require dialysis receive such services, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #35) of 1 residents reviewed for dialysis care. Specifically, for Resident #35, the facility did not ensure there was consistent communication with the dialysis treatment facility and that there was an ongoing assessment of the resident's condition and monitoring for complications following dialysis treatments. Resident #35: The resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, and atrial fibrillation. The Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool) dated 9/19/19, documented the resident was cognitively intact. A Physician's Order initiated on 10/2/19, documented; Upon return from dialysis, obtain vital signs, evaluate resident for mental status, pain, access site condition, review communication sheet to include post-dialysis weight (report if change of +/- 5 pounds), and document…
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 · Ccited before2019-12-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute or serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Food preparation and serving areas and equipment are to be kept clean and good repair. Specifically, food contact equipment and floors in the resident unit satellite kitchenettes were not clean or in good repair. This is evidenced as follows. The satellite kitchenettes were inspected on 12/16/2019 at 10:23 AM. The microwave ovens, dining tables, refrigerator door gaskets, drawers, cabinets, cupboard doors, floor in corners were soiled with food particles. Additionally, cabinets were pitted and warped, and cabinet and cupboard doors would not close when tested. The Regional Dining Service Specialist stated in an interview on 12/16/2019 at 11:53 AM, that she will ensure a cleaning checklist that was sent to this facility will be implemented. 10 NYCRR 415.14(h); Chapter 1 State Sanitary Code Subpart 14-1.90, 14-1.110, 14-1.170
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CENTERS HEALTH CARE — 36 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.8 | -0.8 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OTSEGO KR HOLDING LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 99% | since 01/01/2018 |
| ROZENBERG, BETH | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 5% | since 01/01/2018 |
| ROZENBERG, KENNETH | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 95% | since 01/01/2018 |
| DIMARIA, JOSEPH | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| NORINE, HELEN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 72% 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 $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NY
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 335412. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-05-02, 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.