No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Brookhaven Health Care Facility, LLC

801 Gazzola Blvd, East Patchogue, NY 11772 · For profit - Corporation · 160 certified beds · (631) 447-8800 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (631) 447-8800 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0740)1 actual-harm citation$7,901 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $7,901 in federal fines (most recent 2023-08-23)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
286 Sills Rd · (631) 654-3100 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
285 Sills Rd · (631) 569-4245 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1387 Montauk Hwy · (631) 286-4900 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1 Pacer Ct · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 3 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.9%14.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.7%5.8%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%19.5%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.6%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.2%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.3%13.2%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.9%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control5.0%19.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table21.5%13.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.4%1.2%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.3%78.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.7%20.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.3%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.671.701.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.651.361.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ 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.

63.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 1,007 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

63.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
48.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.85U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.34hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.45hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 48.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 421 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 0.85 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 95% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF63.2%CMS range 58.5–66.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.2%CMS range 10.4–14.010.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge48.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge45.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge58.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified99.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting99.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge97.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.9%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.6%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.1%CMS range 6.4–10.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.411.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.63
RN hours/ resident / day
1.23
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.07
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.94
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.37
RN hoursweekends
29.2%
Total nursing turnover
32.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 160 beds and averages 151.4 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.94 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.43 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.15 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.74 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-04)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-11-26)

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.

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · G2023-08-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 interviews and record review during the Recertification and Abbreviated Survey (NY00304131) initiated on 8/16/2023 and completed on 8/23/2023, the facility did not ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents. This was identified for one (Resident #209) of three residents reviewed for accidents. Specifically, Resident #209, who was assessed at high risk for falls, had specific directions on their Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) for staff to stay inside the bathroom when toileting the resident. Resident #209 was left in the bathroom unattended by staff on 10/20/2022, fell, and sustained a right eyebrow laceration (a deep cut or tear in the skin) measuring 3 centimeters (cm) by 2 cm by 1 cm requiring sutures. This resulted in actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy for Resident #209. The finding is: The facility's Accident/Incident Investigation and Prevention policy dated 6/2023 documented the facility will provide an environment that is free from accident hazards over…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interviews the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility must be labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. This was identified for six (6) (medication carts on Unit A high side, Unit B low and high side, Unit C high side, and Unit D high and low side) of six (6) medication carts reviewed during the Medication Storage Task. Specifically, the medication carts were observed with unidentified loose medication tablets and a hearing screening device stored without a container. The carts were soiled with debris and dried liquid medication residue. The findings are: The Medication/Treatment Labeling and Storage Policy dated 07/2025 documented medications/treatments are stored under proper conditions of sanitation, temperature, light, moisture and ventilation. The policy documented medication/treatment carts are to be kept clean, organized, restocked, and fully equipped. Only drugs/treatments and equipment for preparing and administering drugs/treatments should be stored in a medication…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-04 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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, the facility did not ensure that each resident had the right to self-administer medications if the interdisciplinary team has determined that this practice is clinically appropriate. This was identified for two (2) (Resident #55 and Resident #123) of four (4) residents reviewed for Accident Hazards. Specifically, Resident #55 and Resident #123 were observed on 02/26/2026 and on 02/27/2026 with an inhaler at their bedside. There was no documented evidence that Resident #55 and Resident #123 were assessed by the interdisciplinary team to determine that it was safe for the residents to exercise their right to self-administer. Additionally, there were no physician orders for Resident #55 and Resident #123 to self-administer medications. The findings are:The facility policy titled Self Administration of Medications last revised 11/2021, documented continued approval of the self-administration of medication by the resident is dependent on the resident's compliance…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility did not ensure that it established and maintained 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 and infections. This was identified for two (2) (Resident #55 and Resident #171) of ten (10) Residents reviewed for Infection Control. Specifically, 1) Resident #55 had a physician's order for Enhanced Barrier Precautions and Certified Nursing Assistant #1 was observed providing high contact activities such as dressing the resident, transferring the resident to a chair, and then making the resident's bed, without wearing a gown as required ; 2) Licensed Practical Nurse #2 was observed performing a finger stick blood glucose check on Resident #171 and subsequently cleaned the shared glucometer with a 70% alcohol wipe instead of utilizing an antimicrobial disinfectant as per the manufacturer's instructions.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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-26 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 the Recertification Survey initiated on 11/20/2024 and completed on 11/26/2024, the facility did not ensure the right to self-administer medications if the interdisciplinary team has determined that this practice is clinically appropriate. This was identified for two (Resident #242 and Resident #293) of two residents reviewed for Choices. Specifically, 1) Resident #242 was observed with the inhalers and nasal spray medications at their bedside during the initial tour and the resident stated they self-administered their inhaler medications. There was no documented evidence that Resident #242 was assessed to self-administer their medications. 2) Resident #293 was observed with the inhalers and a nasal spray medication at their bedside during the initial tour. There was no documented evidence that Resident #293 was assessed to self-administer their medications. The finding is: The facility's Self Administration of Medications policy and procedure last…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-26 · tag F0694 — isolated
    Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids 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 the Recertification Survey initiated on 11/20/2024 and completed on 11/26/2024 the facility did not ensure each resident received care and services for the provision of parenteral fluids consistent with professional standards of practice, physician orders, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was identified for one (Resident #343) of four residents reviewed for Infection Control. Specifically, Resident #343 was observed on 11/20/2024 with a left arm Midline Intravenous Catheter dressing that was dated 11/01/2024. Additionally, the external Midline catheter length was not measured and recorded as per the physician's orders. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Line/ Midline Care and Treatment last revised on 5/2024, documented that Midline dressing changes are done within 24 hours of new line placement and then every week and as needed. Measure the external catheter length and record 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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 observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 11/20/2024 and completed on 11/26/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice. This was identified for one (Resident #84) of one resident reviewed for Respiratory Care. Specifically, Resident #84 had a physician's order to continuously receive oxygen therapy via a nasal cannula at 3 Liters per minute. Resident #84 was observed on 11/20/2024, receiving oxygen therapy via a nasal cannula. The nasal cannula was connected to an oxygen tank which was set to deliver oxygen at 3 liters; however, the oxygen tank gauge needle indicated the tank was empty. The finding is: The facility policy titled Oxygen Therapy last revised on 9/2023, documented apply oxygen per physician's order. The clinical staff is to monitor the oxygen tank gauge during care and at 15-minute intervals and notify the nurse if empty. Nurses are 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-26 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
    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 initiated on 11/20/2024 and completed on 11/26/2024, the facility did not ensure that all residents received the necessary behavioral health care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. This was identified for one (Resident #242) of one resident reviewed for Mood and Behavior. Specifically, Resident #242's hospital records indicated that they experienced suicidal ideation and were placed on a three-day suicide watch before admission to the facility. Direct care staff at the facility were not knowledgeable of the resident's recent history of suicidal ideation and did not develop a person-centered plan of care to address the resident's mental health needs based on the resident's psychosocial history. The finding is: The facility's Behavioral Health Services policy dated 11/2016 documented that each resident will receive, and the facility will provide the necessary…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification initiated on 11/20/2024 and completed on 11/26/2024, the facility did not store all drugs and biologicals in secured locked compartments. This was identified for two (Resident #242 and Resident #293) of two residents reviewed for Choices. Specifically, 1) Resident #242 was observed with multiple inhalers and a nasal spray medication at their bedside during the initial tour. There was no nurse observed in the vicinity. 2) Resident #293 was observed with multiple inhalers and a nasal spray medication at their bedside. There was no nurse observed in the vicinity The finding is: The facility's Medication/Treatment Labeling and Storage policy and procedure last revised on 7/2013 documented resident's medications/treatments are to be placed in the proper storage area; medication room, supplies in a clean utility room, treatment cart, or medication cart. Controlled substances are stored in double-locked cabinets in the locked medication…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-23 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    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 (NY00316297) initiated on 8/16/2023 and completed on 8/23/2023, the facility did not permit a resident to return to the facility after hospitalization and did not ensure there was documented evidence that the Resident's representative was notified of discharge. This was identified for one (Resident #411) of five residents reviewed for discharge (DC). Specifically, Resident # 411 was transferred to the hospital on 5/2/2023 and the facility did not allow the resident to be re-admitted to the facility. Resident # 411 was transferred from the hospital to another Nursing Home. Additionally, there was no documented evidence that Resident #411 or the resident's representative received a notice of discharge/transfer with their appeal rights. The finding is: The Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Discharge Notice dated 5/2022, documented the facility accepts and retains only those residents that it can provide care for. The policy…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-23 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure 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 staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/16/2023 and completed on 8/23/2023 the facility did not ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflect the resident's current status. This was identified for one (Resident # 362) of three residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers. Specifically, the Nursing admission Skin assessment dated [DATE] documented Right and Left heel Deep Tissue Injuries (DTI). The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] documented No in section M0210- Unhealed Pressure Ulcer /Injuries. The MDS assessment did not reflect the DTI to the resident's bilateral heels that were noted on the Nursing admission Assessment. The finding is: The facility's, Assessment of Residents policy and procedure updated 2/2020 documented the comprehensive assessment includes at a minimum the resident's skin condition. Review of assessments includes the professional staff shall examine each resident no less than once every 92 days, and 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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 the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/16/2023 and completed on 8/23/2023, the facility did not ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was identified for one (Resident #21) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. Specifically, Resident #21 received oxygen treatment continuously for an acute respiratory infection since 4/18/2023. Resident # 21 was seen by the Pulmonologist on 5/24/2023 who recommended a weaning program and discontinuation of supplemental oxygen; however, Resident #21 remained on continuous oxygen with no indication of need. The finding is: The facility Oxygen Therapy policy revised on 8/2018 documented oxygen is administered appropriately to residents to improve oxygenation and provide comfort to residents experiencing respiratory difficulties. The policy did not address the procedure…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-23 · tag F0711 — isolated
    Ensure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
    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 the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/16/2023 and completed on 8/23/2023, the facility did not ensure that the physician reviewed the resident's total program of care, including medications and treatments. This was identified for one (Resident #21) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. Specifically, Resident #21's attending physician did not evaluate the necessity of the resident to have continuous oxygen treatment and did not address the Pulmonologist's recommendation made on 5/24/2023 for weaning the resident off continuous oxygen . The finding is: The facility's Medical Care policy and procedure revised on 7/2015 documented that the attending physician is responsible for the care of the resident at all times. The attending physician is expected to review medications and note resident response to medications and treatments, monitor for continued need for medication and treatments based on the indication, and review consultations. Any…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$7,901 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $7,901 — penalty dated 2023-08-23

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 THE MCGUIRE GROUP — 6 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.7-0.7 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.5-0.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.7★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
VESTRA SPV1 LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 12/23/2020
VESTRA SPV2 LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 12/23/2020
FARBENBLUM, EDWARDIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/23/2020
LIEBERMAN, ORLYIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/23/2020
GRIGG, SUSANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2024
PHAN, TOMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
ROSSO, RALPHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners 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.

$32.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+0.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$41K
Related-party expense0% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 35%Medicare 41%Other / private 23%

This home reported $41K 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

$646per resident / day
operating cost
$19,641per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$647per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in New York
$15,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,110/mo
Assisted living

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 335694. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-04, 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.

What to do next