Rego Park Nursing Home
111-26 Corona Avenue, Flushing, NY 11368 · For profit - Corporation · 200 certified beds · (718) 592-6400 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 16.0% | 14.1% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.9% | 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 | 0.0% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 80.1% | 19.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.5% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.5% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.9% | 13.2% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.4% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.8% | 6.5% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 3.1% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.1% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.3% | 78.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.1% | 20.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.2% | 9.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.39 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.43 | 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.
38.8% 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 171 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 78.7% 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 150 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 0.48 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 79% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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 | 38.8%CMS range 31.6–46.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.0%CMS range 7.8–14.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 78.7% | 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 | 69.3% | 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 | 70.7% | 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 | 99.6% | 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 | 98.8% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 96.2% | 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 | 0.4% | 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 | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 4.0–10.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.48 | 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 200 beds and averages 194.9 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.02 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.12 to 0.78 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-16 · 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
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (NY00355639), the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, are reported immediately but not later than two hours after the allegation is made to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures. This was evident for one out of three residents (Resident #1) sampled for abuse. Specifically, on 09/20/2024 at 7:30 AM, Resident #1 was observed with an abrasion and redness without any active bleeding on the left forearm. The facility investigated the incident and did not report the injury of unknown origin to the New York State Department of Health. The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure entitled Abuse Investigation and Reporting, with the revision date of 09/16/2024, documented all reports of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property, mistreatment, and/or injuries 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 · F2024-10-16 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide 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 conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/08/2024 to 10/16/2024, the facility did not ensure 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 well-being of each resident. Specifically, the facility reported short staffing on weekends confirmed by a review of the Daily Staffing and the Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report. The findings are: The facility was not able to provide a policy related to facility staffing. The Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report for the 3rd quarter of 2024 (04/01/2024 - 06/30/2024) documented that excessively low weekend staffing was triggered. The Facility assessment dated 10/2024 documented that the facility strives to maintain adequate staffing on each shift to ensure that residents' needs and services are met. Certified Nursing Assistants are available on each shift to provide the needed care and services of each resident as outlined on the residents'…
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 · E2024-10-16 · tag F0582 — patternGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/08/2024 to 10/16/2024, the facility did not ensure a resident, or their designated representative was provided appropriate notification at the termination of Medicare Part A benefits. This was evident in 3 (Residents #46, #294, and #295) of 3 residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notification. Specifically, the facility did not provide the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage for Medicare Part A at least two calendar days before Medicare covered services ended as required, did not ensure that notices were mailed on the same day telephone notification was made, and did not provide the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage form for residents after discharge from skilled services. The findings are: The facility policy titled Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage with a reviewed date of 01/2024 documented that in the event a patient/resident no longer qualifies for a skilled level of care, a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage letter will be issued in accordance with federal guidelines…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-16 · 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
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/08/2024 to 10/16/2024, 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 #52) of 2 residents reviewed for positioning / mobility. Specifically, Resident #52 has been observed on 2 occasions without the hand rolls applied in both hands as per physician orders. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Contractures with a last reviewed date of 01/12/2024 stated that braces and splints are applied by the nursing staff upon physician's order, per the plan of care, and under the direction of Physical/Occupational Therapy. Resident #52 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of Traumatic Brain Injury, Seizure Disorder, and Paranoid Schizophrenia. The Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) dated 06/14/2024 documented that Resident #52 had severely impaired cognition and was dependent in all…
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 · D2023-04-11 · 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 observation, interview, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 4/3/23 to 4/11/23, the facility did not ensure the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. This was evident for 1 (Unit 6) of 6 units. Specifically, Unit 6 was observed with wheelchairs (WC) with torn armrests, torn and frayed mesh on shower chairs, the dining room floor in disrepair, resident closets and bedside tables in disrepair, missing molding, and a bathroom door in disrepair. The findings are: The facility undated policy titled Resident WC Cleaning documented WCs shall be cleaned at least once per month for each resident. On 04/03/2023 at 10:00 AM and 4/10/23 at 11:00AM on Unit 6, the following was observed: 1.) a large shower chair in the tub room with torn and tattered black mesh; 2.) a standard shower chair in the tub room with torn and frayed blue mesh. 3.) bathroom door across from the clean linen room in disrepair with splintering wood along the bottom of the door;…
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 · D2023-04-11 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 4/3/23 to 4/11/23, the facility did not ensure a resident and their representative were provided with a written summary of the baseline care plan (BCP). This was evident for 1 (Resident #61) of 2 residents reviewed for Discharge out of 35 total sampled residents. The findings are: The facility policy titled Care Plans - Baseline reviewed 3/18 documented a baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate needs shall be developed for each resident within forty-eight (48) hours of admission. The resident and their representative will be provided a summary of the BCP. Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of pelvic fracture and fracture of upper right humerus. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #61 was cognitively intact, and the resident and family participated in the assessment and goal setting. On 4/4/23 at 9:05 AM, Resident #61 was interviewed and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-11 · 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 observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 4/3/23 to 4/11/23, the facility did not ensure the participation of the resident and the resident's representative in the development of the comprehensive care plan (CCP), and the review and revision of the CCP after each assessment. This was evident for 2 (Residents #135 and #61) of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1) Resident #135's CCP related to altered respiratory status was not revised to reflect the resident's oxygen use, and 2) Resident #61 was not invited to their CCP meeting. The findings are: The facility policy titled CCP Policy Statement last revised 2022 documented the facility's care planning/interdisciplinary team is responsible for the development of an individualized comprehensive care plan for each resident. A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 4/3/23 to 4/11/23, the facility did not ensure treatment and care were provided in accordnace with professional standards of practice. This was evident for 1 resident (Resident #84) reviewed for Infection/Transmission-Based Precautions out of 35 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility did not ensure Resident #84 received care for a right upper arm intravenous (IV) midline. The findings are: The facility policy titled Midline Dressing changes dated April 2022 documented change the midline catheter dressing 24 hours after catheter insertion, every 7 days, and as needed if it is wet, dirty, not intact, or compromised in any way. Label the dressing with initials, date, and time. Resident #84 was readmitted to the facility 3/24/2023 with diagnoses of diabetes mellitus and anemia. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #84 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance…
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 · D2023-04-11 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 4/3/23 to 4/11/23, the facility did not ensure the physician reviewed the resident's total program of care, including medications and treatments, at each visit. This was evident for 1 resident (Resident #84) reviewed for Infection/Transmission-Based Precautions out of 35 total sampled residents. Specifically, the physician did not evaluate Resident #84 for the continuation of a right upper arm intravenous (IV) midline upon admission, and there were no physician's orders for care of the IV midline. The findings are: The facility policy titled Midline Dressing changes dated April 2022 documented change the midline catheter dressing 24 hours after catheter insertion, every 7 days, and as needed if it is wet, dirty, not intact, or compromised in any way. Label the dressing with initials, date, and time. Resident #84 was readmitted to the facility 3/24/2023 with diagnoses of diabetes mellitus and anemia. The Minimum…
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 · D2023-04-11 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 from 4/3/23 to 4/11/23, the facility did not ensure that residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs. This was evident for 1 (Residents # 136) of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications out of 35 total sampled residents. Specifically, non-pharmacological interventions were not used to address Resident #136's behaviors and an antipsychotic medication was administered without attempting a Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR). The findings are: The facility policy titled Use of Psychotropic Medication dated 2022 documented that the residents are not given psychotropic drugs unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition, as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record and the medication is beneficial to the resident as demonstrated by monitoring and documentation 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.
Show the remaining 6 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-04-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 staff interview during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey (NY00273390), the facility did not ensure that: residents' Comprehensive Care Plans (CCPs) were reviewed and revised after a Fall; and the facility did not ensure cognitively intact cognitively intact residents were invited to participate in the development of their plan of care. Specifically: (1) The residents' CCPs were not reviewed and revised to determine effectiveness of interventions and include new interventions after falls (Resident #51 and #115). (2) Residents were not invited to participate in the care plan meeting (Resident #31 and #48). This was evident for 4 out of 35 residents reviewed in the investigation sample (Resident #s 51, 115, 31, and 48). The findings are: (1) Resident #51 had diagnoses which include Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Hypertension. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 01/27/2021 documented that Resident #51 had severely…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-04-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that infection control practices and procedures were maintained. Specifically, (1) A nurse was observed administering eye drop during medication pass without wearing gloves; (2) oxygen tubing was observed on the floor; and (3) Staff were observed assisting multiple residents without performing hand hygiene between residents or after touching dirty items during the dining preparation and service. This was evident for 1 of 4 residents observed for Med Admin; 2 of out of 31 residents reviewed in the investigation Sample; and random observations on 1 out of 4 units observed for Dining (Unit 6). The findings are: (1) The facility's Policy and procedure for Instillation of Eye Drops dated December 2020 documented the eye drop administration procedure as: Wash and dry your hands thoroughly; Put on gloves (before applying eye drops); Remove gloves (after applying the eye drops), and discard into designated…
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 · D2021-04-08 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
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 conducted during the Recertification survey and abbreviated survey (NY00252328), the facility failed to notify a resident's representative when there was a need to alter treament significantly. Specifically, a resident's representative was not informed when the resident was started on a new medication, Ambien, at bedtime. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Notification of Change (Resident #336). The finding is: The Facility Policy titled Change in a resident's condition dated February 2020 documented the nurse will notify the resident's representative when there is significant change in the resident's physical, mental or psychosocial status. Except in medical emergencies, notifications will be made within 24 hours of a of change occurring in the resident's medical/mental condition or status. The nurse will record in resident's medical record information relative to changes in the resident's medical, and mental condition or status. In adition, the nurse is…
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 · D2021-04-08 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey (NY00273390), the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated within 5 workdays and reported to the administrator or his or her designee. Specifically, Accident/Incident (A/I) investigations were not fully completed to rule out neglect. This was evident for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for Fall (Resident #51 and # 115). The findings are: 1) Resident #51 had diagnoses which include Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Hypertension. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 01/27/2021 documented that Resident #51 had severely impaired cognition with long and short-term memory problems. The MDS documented the resident required Supervision with setup help only for bed mobility, transfer, walking, and locomotion on and off the unit. The resident required limited assistance for toileting, dressing, and personal hygiene, and they were always continent of bowel and bladder. A Nursing Note documented on 03/13/2021 at…
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 · D2021-04-08 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility did not ensure that the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status. Specifically, a resident's Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment documented the resident had a trunk restraint used in the chair or out of bed when the resident had no restraint. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for MDS accuracy (Resident #123). The finding is: The CMS RAI Version 3.0 Manual (Dated October 2018), titled Procedure: General Information documented The RAI, MDS 3.0 process requires input from the health care team to complete the designated areas in a timely and accurate fashion in accordance with State and Federal regulations. Resident #123 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Non-Alzheimer's Dementia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS), Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 3/05/2021, documented the resident had severely impaired cognition with long and short-term memory problems. The MDS also documented that the resident had a Trunk restraint used…
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 · D2021-04-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey (NY00273390), the facility did not ensure adequate supervision and assistance was provided to a resident to prevent an accident. Specifically, a resident identified as high risk for fall/injury, with severely impaired cognition, had fall with injury while trying to use bathroom. The resident's care plan was not reviewed and revised with interventions to prevent additional falls. The resident was readmitted from the hospital and had another fall while attempting to use the bathroom. This was evident in 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Accident/Fall (Resident #51). The finding is: (1) Resident #51 had diagnoses which include Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Hypertension. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 01/27/2021 documented that Resident #51 had severely impaired cognition with long and short-term memory problems. The MDS documented the resident required Supervision with setup help only for bed mobility, transfer, walking, 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.
“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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HERBERT TUCHMAN ESTATE | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | 91% | since 05/01/2012 |
| ADLER, RUTH | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/19/1984 |
| TUCHMAN, MORRIS | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 01/19/1984 |
| TUCHMAN, NELSON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/19/1984 |
| ALEXANDER, SHEELA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/16/2025 |
| REFOUA, DANIEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2025 |
| S&A RE ACQUISITIONS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2025 |
| NACHFOLGER, ISRAEL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2025 |
| STEIN, ALLEN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 83% 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.
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 335379. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-16, 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.