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

Franklin Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing

142 27 Franklin Avenue, Flushing, NY 11355 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 320 certified beds · (718) 670-3400 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (718) 670-3400 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited May 20261 actual-harm citation
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
140-14 Cherry Ave · (718) 886-0355 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens<0.1 mi
4415 Kissena Blvd · (718) 461-8112 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
4447 Kissena Blvd · (718) 888-7658 · Call to confirm hours
Park
47-18 Colden St · (212) 639-9675 · 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 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased9.7%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.5%5.8%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.1%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.4%19.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.5%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened9.2%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication2.0%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.1%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.1%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control3.6%19.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.9%13.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine53.9%78.8%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission18.2%20.6%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.8%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.781.701.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.181.361.80better

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.

29.7% 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 74 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

29.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
53.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.22U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 53.3% 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 92 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 27% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF29.7%CMS range 20.7–41.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.0%CMS range 7.2–14.310.7%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 discharge53.3%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 discharge50.0%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 discharge52.2%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 identified100.0%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 setting100.0%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 discharge100.0%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 stay1.4%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 worsened2.1%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 hospitalization7.4%CMS range 4.0–12.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.161.02Oct 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

0.99
RN hours/ resident / day
0.46
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.17
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.62
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.61
RN hoursweekends
30.1%
Total nursing turnover
31.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 320 beds and averages 309.7 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.62 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.99 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.15 to 0.61 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-02-28)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2022-01-03)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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.

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

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2019-07-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview conducted during the re-certification and abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure that residents were free from abuse, neglect, and exploitation. Specifically, (1) Resident #69 sustained an injury of a laceration to her right leg that required sutures in a resident-to-resident altercation (NY#00215196); and (2) Resident #604 was punched in the head by another resident and suffered a headache and blurred vision (NY#00218990). Both incidents involved the same aggressor (Resident #267). This was evident for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for Abuse (Resident #69 and Resident #604). This deficient practice resulted in actual harm to Resident #69. The findings are: The undated policy for Resident to Resident Abuse documents that the facility will ensure residents' right to be free from verbal and physical abuse and misappropriation of property from other residents. All forms of resident to resident abuse must be reported immediately to the nursing supervisor who will notify 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record reviews, and interviews, conducted during a survey, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from physical abuse. This was evident for one (1) out of seven (7) residents (Resident #1) sampled for abuse. Specifically, on 05/01/2026, Licensed Practical Nurse #1 was giving Resident #1 pain medication. Resident #1 refused the medication by putting their hand over their mouth. Licensed Practical Nurse #1 removed Resident #1's hand and placed the medication in Resident #1's mouth. Resident #1 spit the medication out and Licensed Practical Nurse #1 picked up the medication and gave it to Resident #1. Certified Nursing Assistant #1 who was present stated Resident #1 was refusing their medication.The findings are:The facility's Policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment and Exploitation Prohibition dated 03/16/2026, documented that the facility shall not use or permit verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse, including corporal punishment and involuntary seclusion of residents/patients, or other mistreatment or neglect. This can be directly or…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during a survey, the facility failed to ensure that allegations of abuse were investigated thoroughly and that residents were protected from further abuse during the investigation. This was evident for one (1) out of seven (7) residents (Resident #1) sampled for abuse. Specifically, on 05/01/2026 at approximately 11:25 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse #1 was giving Resident #1 pain medication. Resident #1 refused the medication by putting their hand over their mouth. Licensed Practical Nurse #1 removed Resident #1's hand and placed the medication in their mouth. Resident #1 spit the medication out and Licensed Practical Nurse #1 picked up the medication and gave it to Resident #1. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate the allegation of abuse and remove Licensed Practical Nurse #1 from direct care and access to residents after Certified Nursing Assistant #1 reported the allegations to Registered Nurse Supervisor #1. The findings include:The facility's Policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, and Exploitation…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-12 · 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

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during a survey, the facility failed to ensure each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. This was evident for one (1) out of two (2) residents (Resident #1) sampled for fall. Specifically, Resident #1 who has acquired bilateral below knees amputation was observed on the floor in their room on 05/01/2026. Certified Nursing Assistant #1 went into the room picked up Resident #1 and placed them back into the bed before Resident #1 was assessed by Registered Nurse Supervisor #1. On assessment Resident #1 was observed with a small scratch on their lower lip.The findings are:The facility's Policy title Resident Occurrences, dated 03/07/2023, documented all resident occurrences must be reported and investigated. Plans of correction will be developed in an attempt to prevent re-occurrence and unsafe conditions. Unusual and/or serious events will be brought to the attention of administration, in addition to following the routine procedure. Root Cause Analyses will be conducted by an…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-02-28 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — pattern
    Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 02/21/2024 to 02/28/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident and/or resident's representative were offered the opportunity to participate in the revision and/or review of the comprehensive care plan. This was evident for 3 residents (Resident #31, #142, and #165) reviewed for Care Planning out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1) Resident #31 and/or their designated representative were not invited to their care plan meeting, 2) Resident #142 and/or their designated representative were not invited to their care plan meeting, and 3) Resident # 165 was not invited to their care plan meeting. The findings are: The facility policy and Procedure titled Care Planning - Conferences with approval date 04/17/2021 documented the resident had the right to participate in the planning process, including the right to identify individuals or roles to be included in the planning process. It also documented the Comprehensive…

    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 · D2024-02-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor 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 record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 02/21/2024 to 02/28/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents were provided a safe and homelike environment and that residents received care and services safely and does not pose a safety risk. This was evident for 1 (Resident #5) of 3 residents investigated for Respiratory care out of an investigative sample of 38 residents. Specifically, on 02/22/2024, a Maintenance staff was observed cleaning the air conditioning unit while Resident #5 was in bed sleeping in their room. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Entry of Engineers and Repair Workers dated 03/03/2023 stated that before entering a resident's room, engineers and repair workers must first check in with the nurse on duty in that unit. They should provide details about the nature of the work, estimated duration, and any potential disturbances. The purpose is to ensure the safety, privacy, and dignity of our residents when engineers and repair workers…

    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 · D2024-02-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY00330116) Survey from 02/21/2024 to 02/28/2024, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse and injuries of unknown source were reported immediately but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made to the New York State Department of Health. This was evident for 3 (Resident #655, #203, and #97) of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1) On 02/12/2024, Resident #655 sustained a laceration to their right eyebrow. The injury was not witnessed, and the source of injury could not be explained by the Resident. The injury was not reported to the New York State Department of Health, and 2) On 12/18/2023 at approximately 5:45 AM, Residents #203 and #97 were involved in a resident-to-resident altercation. The alleged incident was not reported to the New York State Department of Health within 2 hours after the allegation was made. The findings are: The facility policy titled Abuse,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-28 · 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 record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 02/21/2024 to 02/28/2024, the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set assessments accurately reflected the residents' status. This was evident for 2 (Resident #181 and Resident#25) of 2 residents sampled for catheter care, out of 38 sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #181's Foley catheter was not documented, and Resident #25 's use of suprapubic catheter was documented as an ostomy, instead of indwelling catheter. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Minimum Data Set Assessment and Completion with an approval date of 02/01/2022 documented that the Minimum Data Set 3.0 manual is to be utilized by all disciplines participating in the completion of the Resident Assessment Instrument and that each individual completing a portion of the assessment, signs and certifies the accuracy of that portion of the assessment. Resident #181 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of Stroke and Cardiac Arrest.…

    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 · D2024-02-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop 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 observations, interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 02/21/2024 to 02/28/2024, the facility failed to ensure a person-centered comprehensive care plan was developed and implemented to meet residents' preferences. This was evident for 1 (Resident #116) of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, a Comprehensive Care Plan was not developed to address Resident #116's preference not to use a urinary catheter privacy bag. The findings are: The facility policy titled Care Planning-Conferences with an approval date of 04/17/2021 stated that the facility will develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident. The policy stated that the comprehensive care plan must be prepared by an interdisciplinary team and other appropriate staff or professionals in disciplines as determined by the resident's needs or as requested by the resident. Resident #116 had diagnosis of Obstructive Uropathy, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, and Bipolar Disorder. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-28 · 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 conducted during a Recertification and Complaint survey (NY00295349) from 02/21/2024 to 02/28/2024, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent elopement. This was evident for 1 (Resident #163) of 5 residents investigated for Accidents out of an investigative sample of 38 residents. Specifically, on 05/02/2022 at 7:45 PM, Resident #163 identified as at high risk for elopement, was able to exit the facility undetected through the fire exit gate on the main floor. Resident #163 was located by the New York City Police Department on 05/04/2022 at an apartment building that Resident claimed they previously lived. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Missing Persons with a review date of 05/06/2022 documented that it is the policy of the facility to ensure that conditions for security of residents and the building and the prevention of a resident from becoming a missing person is maintained at all times through…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-01-03 · 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 conducted during Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each portion of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflects the resident's status. Specifically, the most recent MDS did not accurately indicate tube feeding. This was evident for 1 out of 35 sampled residents reviewed (Resident # 34). The finding is: The facility's policy and procedure titled MDS Assessment and Completion dated 12/01/2020 states that the assessment system will provide a comprehensive, accurate, standardized, reproducible assessment of each resident's functional capabilities and assist staff in identifying health problems and care plan development. The policy further states that the assessment must reflect the resident's status, including the resident's strengths and needs, which must be addressed in an individualized care plan. Resident # 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include Hypertension, Cerebral infarction,…

    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 · D2022-01-03 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, and staff interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that needed services, care and equipment are provided to assure that resident with limited range of motion and mobility maintain or improve function based on the residents' clinical condition. Specifically, (1) a resident was not provided with assistive device - right ankle orthosis and not ambulated as per discharge instructions from the rehabilitation department (2) a resident was not provided with the hand roll device as per plan of care to improve resident's contractures. This was evident for 2 out of 2 residents reviewed for Rehab and Limited ROM, (residents #41 and #106) out of total sample of 35 residents sampled. The findings are: The facility's Policy for Rehabilitation: Contractures-Range of Motion dated 04/04/2012 documented that a resident with limited range of motion receives appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-07-23 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interviews conducted during the Post Survey Revisit, the facility did not ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were dated when opened and discarded in appropriate time frames after opening. Specifically, (1). Two vials of Latanoprost Ophthalmic solution were observed opened and not dated to be discarded 42 days after opening, (2). Three insulin pens were not disposed of by the discard date, (3). Nursing staff were unclear about management of multi-dose vials specifically, what should be dated and when medications should be discarded. This was evident on 7 of 8 units. (Unit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8) The findings are: The facility policy titled Multi-Dose Vials dated 8/10/19 documented multi dose vials for Purified Protein Derivative (PPD), Lantus Insulin and Humalog Insulin vials will be dated once opened and discarded 28 days after opening. The policy also documented all other multi-dose vials (e.g. Influenza, Insulin, Pneumovax, etc.) may be used up to the listed…

    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 · E2019-07-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interviews during recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that food was stored and prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, potentially hazardous cold foods were not maintained at the proper temperature (at or below 41 degrees Fahrenheit), and equipment was not properly sanitized during cleaning. This was evident for the Kitchen Observation facility task. The findings are: 1). The facility's policy and procedure titled New [NAME] Food Service/Dietary Department Making Sandwiches, effective 01/2018, documented that all cold sandwiches should be prepared on ice, labeled, dated, and refrigerated immediately. The policy and procedure titled Food Service/Dietary Department Storage of Cold Food dated 01/2018 documented: The facility will hold cold food as per the parameters specified by ServSafe. Cold food will be held at 41 degrees or lower before removing from refrigeration, and the food will be discarded immediately if 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary 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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
MURRAY, DEREKIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 08/02/2010
WEBSTER, HELENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 01/01/2009
WEBSTER, MOSHEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 01/01/2009
FASTEN, NAFTALIIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2023
WEISS, AHARONIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2012
NAKDIMEN, SHELLYIndividualGENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 08/22/2002
WEBSTER, BENIndividualGENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 01/01/2009
WEBSTER, BORUCHIndividualGENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 01/01/2009
WEBSTER, YECHESKELIndividualLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 01/01/2009

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$54.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense2% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 91%Medicare 4%Other / private 4%

About 91% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.3M 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

$466per resident / day
operating cost
$14,155per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$477per 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 335426. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-02-28, 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