Oceanview Nursing & Rehabilitation Care Center
315 Beach 9th Street, Far Rockaway, NY 11691 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 102 certified beds · (718) 471-6000 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0602, F0603) — most recent Nov 2023
- 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
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (23) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 5 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 improved from 1 to 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 | 7.6% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.0% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 19.2% | 19.5% | 6.5% | typical for the 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 | 0.3% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.2% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.6% | 13.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 12.9% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.1% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.4% | 13.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.6% | 78.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.5% | 20.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.2% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.63 | 1.70 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 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.
20.7% 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 159 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 90.6% 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 96 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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 | 20.7%CMS range 15.9–26.0 | 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 | 14.1%CMS range 10.6–17.0 | 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 | 90.6% | 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 | 86.5% | 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 | 76.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 94.6% | 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 | 93.6% | 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 | 97.8% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 11.9%CMS range 6.8–16.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.43 | 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 102 beds and averages 97.9 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.72 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.56 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 2.62 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.76 on weekdays — 5% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
23 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the abbreviated survey (NY00353729), the facility failed to ensure the resident was free of significant medication errors. This was evident for one (1) out of three (3) residents sampled (Resident #1). Specifically, on 09/06/2024, Licensed Practical Nurse #1 administered 150 milligrams of Methadone instead of 35 milligrams of Methadone to Resident #1. Resident #1 was alert and stable with no complaints of pain or discomfort and was escorted for scheduled hemodialysis therapy. The findings are: The Facility Policy and Procedure titled Medication Administration, dated August 2023, documented the purpose of the policy is to ensure that residents receive medications in a safe and efficient manner and to avoid medication errors include wrong resident, wrong dose and wrong time. The Facility Policy and Procedure titled Medication Administration, reviewed and updated September 2024, included details of the five rights for prevention of 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-07 · 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, record review, and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly and comfortable interior were provided to the residents. This was evident during environmental observation. Specifically, resident rooms were observed with mismatched paint, uneven floor, and ripped door kick plate, mattress in disrepair, and broken side tables. The findings include but are not limited to: The facility's undated policy titled Environmental Services documented it is the policy of the facility to safely and properly clean floor surfaces, the purpose of the procedure was to provide guidelines for cleaning and disinfecting resident rooms. The policy documented housekeeping surfaces, including tabletops, will be cleaned on a regular basis when spill occurs and when these surfaces are visibly soiled. During observation on 03/02/2025 between 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM and on 03/07/2025, 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 · E2025-03-07 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure that sufficient nursing staff were available to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing of each resident. Specifically, the facility reported short staffing on weekends for the quarter of July- September 2024 which was confirmed by a review of the Weekend Staffing and the Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report. The findings include but are not limited to: The facility policy titled Staffing Guidelines with a last reviewed date of 09/2024 documented that the facility will promote resident quality care and safety by ensuring adequate and competent staffing levels that are based on the facility assessment. The Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report for the 4th quarter of 2024 (07/01/2024 to 09/30/2024) documented excessively low weekend staffing was triggered. The Facility Assessment Tool which was last updated on 01/07/2025…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-07 · 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
Based on observation, record review, and interviews during Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025 the facility did not ensure safe food storage was practiced. This was evident during Kitchen Observation. Specifically, outdated food items were observed in the kitchen refrigerator. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Storage and Holding Timeframe for Food Items with a last reviewed date 09/2023 documented to ensure safe food consumption, food items will be dated, placed in a container and if not consumed will be discarded. During the initial tour of the kitchen on 03/02/2025 from 10:00 AM to 10:30 AM, the following expired items were observed stored in the kitchen refrigerator: 1. Dietary prepared snack of 20 plastic cups of 4 ounces cottage cheese with a labeled date of 02/24/2025. 2. 8 plastic cups of 4 ounces skim milk with a labeled date of 02/24/2025. 3. 4 plastic cups of 4 ounces cut pears with a labeled date of 02/24/2025. 4. 20 plastic cups of 4 ounces cranberry juice with a labeled date of 01/01/2025. On 03/03/2025 at 11:08 AM, Dietary Aide…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity was maintained. This was evident in 2 (Resident #32 and #40) of 23 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1.) Resident #32's urinary drainage bag was not placed in a dignity bag (a bag used to the cover and hold the catheter drainage/collection bag, so it is not visible) and was visible from the hallway, and 2.) Licensed Practical Nurse #2 remained standing while feeding Resident #40. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity with a revised date of 07/2024 documented it is the practice of the facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity as well as care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that maintains or enhances resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality. 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 · D2025-03-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure that a resident with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services, including provision of equipment, to prevent further decline in range of motion. This was evident in 1 (Resident #41) of 2 residents reviewed for positioning / mobility out of 21 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #41 was observed multiple times without a left-hand roll in place as per physician's order. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Adaptive Devices with a last reviewed date of 10/2023 stated it was the policy of the facility to provide adaptive devices to its residents. All adaptive devices with current orders with physician and nursing staff will be picked up by nursing staff and entered to the Certified Nursing Assistant Accountability with correct don/on/off devices with appropriate wearing schedule. Resident #41 had 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 · D2025-03-07 · 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 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure that a therapeutic diet was provided when there is a nutritional problem, and the health care provider orders a therapeutic diet. This was evident in 1 (Resident #3) of 2 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living out of 23 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #3, who had a physician's order for thickened liquid, was observed drinking juice without a thickener. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Thicken Up with a last revised date of 12/2024 documented that there are Thicken Up Instant Food Thickener on the trays based on Physician's, Dietician's, Nursing, and Speech Therapist evaluations of swallowing ability related to fluids. Thicken Up is ordered for those with swallowing issues for fluids. The facility's policy titled Activities of Daily Living with a last revised date of 11/2024, documented that nursing staff are in serviced…
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 · D2023-11-02 · tag F0603 — failed to not confine residents against their will — isolatedProtect each resident from separation (from other residents, his/her room, or confinement to his/her room).
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00318543), the facility did not ensure a resident's rights to be free from involuntary seclusion. This was evident for one resident (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed. Specifically, on 07/06/23 at 12:45 AM, the Facility's Administrator observed Resident #1's room door was closed, and a plastic garbage bag was tied from the doorknob to the handrail in the hallway. Resident #1 was in the lock room. The Administrator initiated an investigation and reviewed the Facility's surveillance camera. The camera revealed that starting from 06/23/23, staff members used plastic garbage bags to keep Resident #1's room door locked. The staff members seen on the video were terminated. All staff were re-in-serviced on abuse, neglect, and mistreatment. The Findings are: The Facility's Policy & Procedure titled, Prohibition of Resident Abuse/Neglect, last reviewed 07/2023, defines Involuntary Seclusion as separation of a resident from other residents or from their roommate, or confinement to their room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-10-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview conducted during the recertification survey the facility did not ensure an effective infection prevention and control program. This was evident during review of the Legionella Plan and the [NAME] Unit during Medication Administration. Specifically, 1) there were no remediation plan put in place after greater than 30 percent samples tested for legionella were positive, and 2) blood pressure (BP) cuffs were not disinfected after use between Resident #81, #69, and #87. The findings are: The facility policy titled Infection Control Policy: Multipurpose Equipment Cleaning dated last reviewed October 2023 documented all multipurpose equipment must be cleaned and disinfected between resident use. The policy further stated cleanse multipurpose equipment with germicidal/antimicrobial disinfectant disposable wipe. 1) On October 6 2023, during the Annual Recertification survey of the facility, legionella testing results were reviewed from June 29 2023, and it was noted…
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 before2023-10-11 · 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
Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification survey of 10/2/23 through 10/11/23, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was evident during the Kitchen observation. Specifically, items were observed stored undated and with opened packaging, observation of staff not washing hands or changing gloves before handling food after entering and exiting the walk-in refrigerator, and staff were observed not wearing facial hair coverings. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Labeling and Dating Stored Food, effective date 11/2008, review date 8/2023, states the procedure of How to Properly Store, Label and Date Foods in Various Areas of the Kitchen: keep all foods on shelves, off the floor, opened packages should be wrapped or otherwise sealed; refrigerators: always remove any leftovers of canned foods from the original container, transfer to a sealed container and label and date the container for storage; indicate the date on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 13 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-11 · tag F0568 — isolatedProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, during the recertification survey 10/2/23 through 10/11/23, the facility did not ensure the individual financial record was made available to the resident and/or resident representative through quarterly statements. This was evident for 1 (Resident #61) of 2 residents reviewed for Personal Funds out of a sample of 25 residents. Specifically, there was no evidence quarterly statements were provided to a resident or their representative. The findings are: A facility policy and procedure titled Conveyance of Funds revision date 4/23 documented statements are prepared quarterly and provided to residents and/or their responsible parties. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #61 had moderately impaired cognition and was diagnosed with Non-Alzheimer's Dementia and Depression. On 10/02/23 at 9:34AM, an interview was conducted with Resident #61's next of kin (NOK) who stated that they do not receive a quarterly bank statement unless they ask for one. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification survey conducted from 10/02/23 to 10/11/23, the facility did not ensure that a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment was provided to residents. Specifically, rusty brown color, dirty shower wall tiles, build up dirt in the bathroom tiles, were observed in resident's rooms, hallways, a urine odor in the common areas, debris on the floor, and a garbage bin overflowing. This was evident in multiple areas on the [NAME] Side unit. The findings are The facility policy and procedure titled, Daily General Cleaning -All Residents Areas last dated 11/2022 documented sweep all flooring using chemical treated mop, empty and clean all waste basket receptacles, damp dust daily. The policy further stated, after daily through cleaning, all residents areas will be polished periodically throughout the day. All floors will be mopped daily using a germicidal solution. During observations of the environment conducted on the [NAME] Side unit from…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey of 10/2/23 through 10/11/23, the facility did not ensure that person-centered care plans (CCP) with measurable goals, time frames and interventions were developed to address a resident's concerns. This was evident for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #304) reviewed for Nutrition and 1 of 5 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for unnecessary medications, out of a sample of 25 total residents. Specifically, 1) a CCP was not developed for Resident #304 with liver cancer and hepatitis C, and 2) a CCP was not developed to address the care needs of Resident #36 with a Foley catheter. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) dated 5/23 documented all residents will have a CCP completed in accordance with federal and state requirements. The CCP will include measurable goals with time frames to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and psychosocial needs. 1. The Minimum Data Set…
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 · D2023-10-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification and abbreviated survey of 10/2/23 through 10/11/23, the facility did not ensure that the comprehensive care plans (CCP) were reviewed and/or revised after each assessment and as needed. Specifically, a resident with a new order for a positioning device did not have their CCP updated for that intervention. This was evident for 1 of 1 (Resident #44) reviewed for limited range of motion (ROM). The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP), issue date 5/2015, review date 5/23, states all residents will have a CCP completed in accordance with federal and state requirements. The CCP will include measurable goals with time frames to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and psychosocial needs as identified in the Minimum Data Set (MDS). The CCP will be developed, reviewed, and revised by the interdisciplinary team as follows: initial admission, re-admission from hospital, quarterly after completion 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 · D2023-10-11 · 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 observation, record review and staff interview, during the Recertification survey , the facility did not ensure that residents who need respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and suctioning are provided such care including supplies, as consistent with current professional standards of practice, the comprehensive care plan and resident's goal and preferences. It was observed there was no extra tracheal cannula on the resident's bedside. Furthermore, available supplies had an expiration dated of 2005, 2018 and 01/2023 . This was evidenced in 1 of 1 resident investigated for respiratory care in a sample of 25. Resident #56. The finding is : The facility Policy and Procedure titled tracheostomy Care with a revision date of 08/2023 on the purpose documented, Oceanview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center provides appropriate care for any resident presented with tracheostomy as prescribed by the physician, to maintain airway patency, maintain Infection Control standards and prevent skin breakdown at stoma…
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 · D2023-10-11 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — isolatedHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification and Complaint survey conducted 10/02/2023 to 10/11/2023, the facility did not ensure the Director of Nursing (DNS) served as a charge nurse/Supervisor, only when the facility has an average daily occupancy of 60 or fewer residents. Specifically, there was documented evidence the DNS worked as a Nursing supervisor on multiple occasions when the facility had no registered Nurse assigned. The findings are: The facility policy titled Director of Nursing/Administration dated last reviewed October 2023 documented the DNS should delegate unit-level responsibilities to appropriate nursing staff members and support addressing concerns and complaints, taking corrective action. Actual Daily Staffing Schedules documented the DNS assigned as Nursing Supervisor on the Evening shifts on the following dates: June 2023: 6/3/2023, 6/7/2023, 6/9/2023, 6/15/2023, , 6/16/2023, 6/18/2023, 6/24/2023, 6/27/2023, 6/28/2023, and 6/29/2023. July 2023: 7/5/2023, 7/6/2023, 7/12/2023, 7/14/2023, 7/18/2023, 7/21/2023,…
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 · D2023-10-11 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 conducted from 10/02/23 to 10/11/23,and complaint (NY00306641 ) survey, the facility did not ensure that a resident was free from financial abuse. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse in a sample of 25 (Resident # 155). Specifically, a resident complained that a staff borrowed money and has not paid back the loan. The finding is: The facility Policy and Procedure titled, Prohibition of Residents Abuse/Neglect and Misappropriation of Property with a revised date of 07/2023 documents, Residents have the right to be free from exploitation and misappropriation of property and neglect. The procedure documents, To comply with New York State and Federal regulations, provide patients/residents with considerate and respectful care which promotes independence and dignity in an environment free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of property. The policy defines Exploitation 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 · D2023-10-11 · 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 interview during the Recertification and Complaint survey (NY 00306641) ,the facility did not ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect , including misappropriation of property were reported in a timely manner to the Department of Health. This was evidenced in 1 of 5 residents reviewed for abuse in a sample of 25. (Resident #155) . Specifically, a resident complained that a staff member borrowed money and has not paid back the loan. The finding is : The facility Policy and Procedure titled Prohibition of residents Abuse/Neglect and Misappropriation of property with a revised date of 07/2023 documented it is illegal to improperly use adult funds, property assets or resources by another individual including but not limited to fraud , social media , false pretences, embezzlement, conspiracy, forgery, falsifying records, coerced property transfer of denial access of assets . Resident # 155 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses : Anemia, Atrial Fibrillation,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2021-06-18 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure proper sanitation procedures were followed for the prevention of foodborne illnesses. Specifically, the low temperature dishwasher machine did not meet manufacturer's instructions and regulatory requirements with a wash temperature of 120- to 140- degrees Fahrenheit. The wash temperature on the dishwasher machine read 100- and 90-degrees Fahrenheit during two observations. This was evident during completion of the Kitchen task. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure titled, Low Temperature Dishwasher (Dated 05/15/2020) documented dishes will be sanitized at low temperature between 120- and 140-degrees Fahrenheit. Procedures to operate the machine also documented to check temperatures and follow the manufacturer's recommendations of 120 to 140 degrees Fahrenheit. The operating instructions for the low temperature dishwasher documented the recommended temperature of 140 degrees Fahrenheit for the wash to be used. The dishwasher temperature and chlorine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-18 · 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 record reviews and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessments were completed accurately to reflect the resident's status. Specifically, two (2) residents diagnoses were not accurately coded for mood disorder (Resident #34) and Schizophrenia (Resident #8), one (1) resident was inaccurately coded for having a mechanical ventilator (Resident #8), and one (1) resident was not accurately coded for receiving dialysis services (Resident #3). This was evident for 3 of 27 sampled residents investigated (Resident #3, #8, and #34). The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled, Minimum Data Set (MDS) Completion (Dated 07/2020) documented that the assessment should accurately reflect the resident's status. AN accurate assessment required collecting information from multiple sources. Assessors will review supporting documentation available during the look back periods to ensure accuracy. (1) Resident #8 was admitted on [DATE] with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2025-03-07 · tag F0640 — widespreadEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure Minimum Data Set assessments were electronically transmitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Data System within 14 days after assessments were completed. This was evident in 5 (Residents #6, #41, #48, #88, #92) of 5 residents reviewed for Resident Assessment. Specifically, Minimum Data Set assessments were not transmitted within 14 days after the assessments were completed. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Minimum Data Set 3.0 Completion with a revised date of 05/2024 documented that submissions should be done according to the Resident Assessment Instrument manual and federal and state guidance. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment for Resident #6 was completed on 02/09/2025 and was transmitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Data System on 03/02/2025. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment for Resident #41 was completed on 02/06/2025 and was transmitted to the Centers for Medicare 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.
- No harm found · C2025-03-07 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure the daily nurse staffing information included all the required information. This was evident during review of the Staffing Task. Specifically, the daily posting of nurse staffing information did not include the total number of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care. The findings are: The facility policy titled Staffing Guidelines with a last reviewed date of 09/2024 documented that the facility will post the nursing staff information including the census on a daily basis at the beginning of each shift. During multiple observations from 03/02/2025 through 03/03/2025, the nurse staffing information was posted on a door in the front lobby near the security desk. The information that was documented on the form included the facility name, date, resident census, and actual number of hours worked by licensed and unlicensed nursing staff. There was no documentation of the total number of licensed 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.
- No harm found · B2025-03-07 · tag F0868 — patternHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 03/02/2025 to 03/07/2025, the facility did not ensure that the Medical Director consistently participated or attended the Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. Specifically, the Medical Director had not participated in 2 of the Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement (QAPI) and Quality Assessment & Assurance (QAA) meetings. The findings are: The facility policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) and Quality Assurance (QAA)with a last revision date of 12/04/2024 stated the purpose of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement is to study, plan, analyze and validate specific areas of improvement for positive resident care outcomes. The committee members include Members of the Governing Board, Administrator, Medical Director, Director of Nursing Services, Infection Preventionist, Director of Rehabilitation, Director of Environmental Services, Director of Food Services/Dietary, Director of Social Services and Direct Care Staff. A review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LOUIS WOLCOWITZ ESTATE | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 95% | since 10/20/2023 |
| WOLCOWITZ, PIA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 5% | since 04/01/2025 |
| CALAMUSA, KELLY ANN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| ROSENBERG, BENZION | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| MRR CONSULTING INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| ARORA, ARUN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| WOLCOWITZ, ARON | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/12/2025 |
| WOLCOWITZ, ELIAS | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/12/2025 |
| WOLCOWITZ, MOSHE | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/12/2025 |
| CREDIT SHELTER TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| KAYRIDE ASSOCIATES | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| LPW FAMILY LEGACY IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| MARTIN FRIEDMAN CPA PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| RENEW MEDICAL OF NEW YORK PLLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2026 |
| RYTES COMPANY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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.
This home reported $596K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NY
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335168. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-07, 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.