Glengariff Health Care Center
141 Dosoris Lane, Glen Cove, NY 11542 · For profit - Corporation · 262 certified beds · (516) 676-1100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2025
- 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 (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 2 to 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 | 15.7% | 14.1% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.1% | 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 | 0.6% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 96.5% | 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 | 2.8% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.3% | 12.5% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.7% | 13.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.6% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 6.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.0% | 19.5% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.1% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.6% | 78.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.5% | 20.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 3.8% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.64 | 1.70 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.71 | 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.
64.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 651 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 57.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 313 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 76% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 | 64.4%CMS range 59.4–67.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.3%CMS range 7.4–11.8 | 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 | 57.2% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 55.3% | 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 | 58.8% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 95.1% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.7% | 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 | 6.0%CMS range 4.3–8.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.25 | 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 262 beds and averages 240.7 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 21 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.16 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.87 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.24 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
35 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-19 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that there was sufficient nursing staff 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. This was identified on one (1) (Unit 2) of six (6) resident units reviewed for the Sufficient Nursing Staffing Task. Specifically, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Payroll-Based Journal Staffing Data Report for Fiscal Year Quarter Three (3) 2025 (April 1st- June 30th) indicated that the facility had excessively low weekend staffing. Additionally, two (2) (Resident #4 and #214) out of nine (9) residents in the Resident Council Task reported complaints about short staffing; and a random sampling of facility nursing staffing assignments did not reflect the staffing ratio as indicated in the Facility Assessment for Certified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident was treated with respect and dignity and in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #5) of one (1) resident reviewed for Dignity. Specifically, on 09/11/2025, Resident #5 was observed in bed sleeping with a clear plastic bag tied to their bed rail, visible from the hallway. The plastic bag was filled with soiled briefs, smeared feces, and used tissues. There was no staff within the vicinity of Resident #5's room. The finding is:The facility's policy titled Dignity, last revised on 09/04/2025, documented that residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times. Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances their sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth 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 · D2025-11-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed to accurately reflect each resident's status. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #6) of five (5) residents reviewed for Nutrition and for one (1) (Resident #7) of two (2) residents reviewed for Urinary Catheter or UTI (Urinary Tract Infection). Specifically, 1) Resident #6 had a significant weight loss, which was not identified in the 5-Day Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], and 2) Resident #7's bladder and bowel function related to the use of an indwelling catheter was not accurately reflected in the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE].The findings are: The facility's policy titled MDS (Minimum Data Set) Accuracy, dated 09/04/2025, documented the information captured on the assessment reflects the status of the resident during the observation period for that assessment. Any person…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet the resident's medical and nursing needs. This was identified for one (1) resident (Resident #1) of three (3) residents reviewed for Respiratory Care and for one (1) (Resident #80) of one (1) resident reviewed for Insulin. Specifically, 1) Resident #1 had a Physician Order for Oxygen continuously at two (2) liters per minute. During observations on 09/11/2025, Resident #1 was receiving oxygen at five (5) liters per minute, and on 09/12/2025, the resident was receiving oxygen at three (3) liters per minute. 2) Resident #80's comprehensive care plan was not person centered to include the use of a continuous glucose monitoring device used by the resident for Diabetes management.The findings are: The facility's policy titled Oxygen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that a resident who is unable to carry out Activities of Daily Living (ADL) receives the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #131) of two (2) residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Specifically, Resident #131, who had severely impaired cognition and required staff assistance with Activities of Daily Living, was not dressed and assisted out of bed until after 2:00 PM. The assigned Certified Nursing Assistant #2 did not provide morning care to Resident #131 because they were providing care to the other residents on their assignment. The finding is:The facility's policy titled Activities of Daily Living, dated 12/09/2022, documented that all residents shall be supported in performing Activities of Daily Living to the greatest extent of their ability. Staff will…
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 before2025-11-19 · 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 staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #27) of three (3) residents reviewed for Hydration. Specifically, Resident #27 was observed on 9/11/2025 at 10:53 AM with a peripheral intravenous catheter (a short flexible tube inserted into a peripheral vein to deliver fluids, medications, and blood products directly into a patient's bloodstream) to the left forearm covered with a transparent dressing that was dated 08/28/2025. Additionally, there was no Physician's order to flush the intravenous catheter and monitor the area. The finding is:The facility's policy titled Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Insertion, last revised on 09/04/2025, documented that Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Insertion is performed by the Licensed Nurses according to state…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that the resident maintained, to the extent possible, acceptable parameters of nutritional and hydration status. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #240) of five (5) residents reviewed for Nutrition. Specifically, Dietitian #2 recommended Resident #240 to receive a liquid nutritional supplement of Two Cal HN (protein and calorie-dense supplement) twice daily for additional calories and protein; however, the supplement was never ordered. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Interdisciplinary Management and Prevention of Significant Weight Loss Nursing Facility Residents, reviewed 09/04/2025, documented the Clinical Dietitian will communicate to the Physician and Head/Charge Nurse any nutritional recommendations based on assessment.Resident #240 had diagnoses that included Urinary Obstruction and Shortness of Breath. The 5-Day Minimum Data…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0710 — isolatedObtain a doctor's order to admit a resident and ensure the resident is under a doctor's care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (2609906) initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure the medical care of each resident was supervised by a Physician. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #246) of three (3) residents reviewed for Hospitalization. Specifically, Resident #246's Physician indicated in multiple progress notes that the resident's Foley urinary catheter should be flushed with normal saline. However, there was no physician's order written for flushing the catheter, and no documented evidence that the catheter was flushed by the nursing staff.The finding is:The undated facility policy titled Foley Catheter Care and Privacy documented the catheter should be monitored for patency (free flowing). If signs of blockage occur, for example, reduced or no urinary output, appropriate steps should be taken, including irrigating the catheter, if necessary, with a physician's order.Resident #246 was admitted with diagnoses including Obstructive Uropathy (a blockage in the urinary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that drugs and biologicals were stored in a locked compartment. This was identified for one (Resident #5) of five (5) residents reviewed for Accident Hazards. Specifically, a tube of unlabeled Lidocaine and Prilocaine (local anesthetic that numbs tissue) cream 2.5 percent was observed on Resident #5's overbed table. There was no Nursing staff in the vicinity of Resident #5 's room. Resident #5 was not assessed to self-administer their medications. The finding is:The facility's policy titled Medication Labeling Storage Policy, last revised on 06/19/2025, documented that the facility stores all medications and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature, humidity, and light controls. Only authorized personnel have access to the keys. The nursing staff is responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews, during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident's medical record was in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices and was complete and accurately documented. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #7) of two residents reviewed for Urinary Catheter. Specifically, Resident #7's Foley Catheter was removed on 06/11/2025 for a voiding trial (an assessment to see if the resident can effectively urinate after a catheter is removed); however, the Physician's order, comprehensive care plan, and nursing assistant instruction (Kardex report) continued to document that Resident #7 required Foley Catheter care until September 2025.The finding is:The facility's policy titled Physician Orders last revised on 09/04/2025, documented if any order is unclear or appears incorrect, the nurse must contact the ordering Physician for clarification prior to confirming the order…
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 25 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey, initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure it maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This was identified for two (2) (Resident #99 and #238) of four (4) residents observed during Medication Administration. Specifically, during the medication administration observation, Licensed Practical Nurse #5 did not perform hand hygiene after administering medications for Resident #238 and before preparing the medications to administer to Resident #99.The finding is:Resident #238 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Cerebral Infarction, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Diabetes. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, which indicated the resident had intact cognition.Resident #9 was admitted to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-21 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review during an abbreviated survey conducted on 3/19/2025 through 04/21/2025 for case number NY00375018 the facility failed to protect each resident's right to be free from physical abuse. This was identified for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for physical abuse. Specifically, video surveillance showed Licensed Practical Nurse #1 pointing their right finger at Resident #1's face. Licensed Practical Nurse #1 reaches forward with both hands, places them at Resident #1's neck, and pushes them backwards in their wheelchair. The incident was discovered when a staff member was reported as injured by Resident #1. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation- Reporting and Investigating created on 3/2022 and revised on 6/21/24 documented that if resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property or injury of unknown source is suspected, the suspicion must be reported immediately to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-27 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review during an abbreviated survey conducted on 9/3/24 through 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that the alleged violations involving abuse, including injuries of unknown source, neglect, or mistreatment were reported within 24 hours to the New York State Department of Health. This was identified for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of three resident records reviewed for Abuse. 1) Specifically, Resident #1 was observed with areas of bruises to their forehead and area above their right eye. The cause of this injury was unknown. 2) Resident #2 was pushed by another resident and fell to the ground hitting their head on 08/06/2024 and neither (Resident #1 and Resident #2) incidents were not reported to the New York State Department of Health as required. The findings are: 1) The facility's policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation- Reporting and Investigating created on 3/2022 and revised on 6/21/24 documented that if resident abuse, neglect,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-27 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review during an abbreviated survey conducted on 9/3/24 through 9/18/24, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including an injury of unknown origin were thoroughly investigated. This was identified for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, 1) Resident # 1 was observed with an injury of unknown origin to the right side of their face and eyebrow area on 9/1/24. 2) Resident #2 was pushed by another resident and fell to the ground hitting their head on 08/06/2024.There is no documented evidence that the facility did a thorough investigation of the incidents to identify the root cause of the injury and to rule out Abuse, Neglect, and Mistreatment. This is a repeat deficiency. The findings are: 1) The facility's policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation- Reporting and Investigating created on 3/2022 and revised on 6/21/24 documented that all allegations are…
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 · D2024-09-27 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 during an abbreviated survey conducted on 9/25/24 through 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that care was provided in accordance with professional standards and by individuals qualified to do so. Specifically, the facility had a Licensed Practical Nurse serving in the capacity of Unit Manager completing assessments for 17 out of 17 reviewed records following accidents and falls on their unit. This Licensed Practical Nurse placed their name on the form in the space titled Registered Nurse Supervisor and signed their name and title on the completed document which is out of the scope of practice for a Licensed Practical Nurse. The findings are: An undated job description for Registered Nurse or Licensed Practical Nurse Unit Manager was reviewed and documented Prepare incident/accident reports events and observations using the Electronic Medical Record system. There was no documented evidence of who should complete the assessment in the Unit Manager Job…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-07 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (NY 00337626) initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, the facility did not ensure that all incidents including the injury of unknown origin were thoroughly investigated. This was identified for two (Resident #530 and Resident #140) of six residents reviewed for Accidents and for one (Resident #133) of three residents reviewed for Abuse. Specifically, 1) on 2/16/2024 Resident #530 was found on the floor and sustained a hematoma (bruising) to the forehead and skin tears on both arms. The facility did not thoroughly investigate the incident to identify the root cause and to rule out Abuse, Neglect, and Mistreatment. Additionally, the facility did not ensure that the investigation summary of the incident was completed within 5 days as required. 2) Resident #140 had multiple injuries of unknown origin from 9/22/2023 to 5/6/2024 and the facility did not thoroughly investigate the injuries of unknown origin…
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 · E2024-05-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, 1) the facility did not ensure that 1) medications were administered within one hour of the ordered administration time on two (Unit 2 [NAME] and Unit 1 West) of four units during unit observations, and 2) the drug records were in order and accounted for all controlled drugs on one (Unit [NAME] 1) of six units observed during the medication storage task. Specifically, 1) on 4/29/2024 on Unit 2 [NAME] in the Glengariff building, three residents (Resident #126, #131, and #32) did not get their 9:00 AM medications within one hour of the physician-ordered administration time; and on 4/30/2024 on Unit 1 [NAME] in the Glengariff building eleven residents (Resident #134, #151, #331, #82, #34, #92, #95, #8, #46, #157, #178) did not get their 9:00 AM medications within one hour of the physician-ordered administration time; and 2) During the medication storage task observation the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-07 · 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 record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Extended Survey (NY 00321997) initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024 the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury. This was identified for two (Resident #151 and Resident #82) of three residents reviewed for Abuse. Specifically, Resident #151 and Resident #82 were involved in a resident-to-resident altercation on 8/11/2023, in which Resident #151 was allegedly pushed by Resident #82 and fell to the floor. The incident of resident to resident altercation was not reported to the New York State Department of Health until three days after the incident, on 8/14/2023. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation Prevention Program revised…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-07 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, the facility did not ensure that preadmission screening for individuals with a mental disorder and individuals with intellectual disability was conducted prior to their admission to the facility. This was identified for one (Resident #18) of 40 residents reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (a federal requirement to ensure that residents were not inappropriately placed in a skilled nursing facility). Specifically, Resident # 18 was admitted [DATE], the Level 1 Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) screening was not completed by the facility staff until 7/16/2023, two days after the resident's admission to the facility. The finding is: The facility's policy and procedure titled, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) last revised in December 2023 documented all residents to have the required pre-admission screen prior to admission to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on [DATE] and completed on [DATE], the facility did not ensure that each resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible. This was identified for one (Resident #531) of six residents reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #531 was not assessed to safely self-administer their medications. On [DATE] an inhaler (handheld devices that allow you to breathe medicine in through your mouth, directly to your lungs) was observed in Resident #531's room with no staff member present. The inhaler did not have a label that indicated the resident's name or direction for the administration. Additionally, Resident #531 did not have a Physician's order for the use of the inhaler. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure titled, Medication Administration last revised in 12/2023 documented only people licensed or permitted by the state to prepare, administer, and document the administration 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 · D2024-05-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024 the facility did not ensure that the medication regimen review recommendations that were approved by the physician were implemented. This was identified for one (Resident #24) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Specifically, on 3/12/2024 the consultant Pharmacist recommended the addition of a calcium supplement to Resident #24's medication regimen. The resident's Physician approved the recommendation made by the consultant Pharmacist; however, there was no physician's order written for the calcium supplement and the resident did not receive the recommended supplement. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Drug Regimen Review, dated 12/2023, documented the consultant Pharmacist shall identify, document, and report possible medication irregularities for review and action by the attending Physician. The attending Physician or licensed designee shall respond to the drug regimen review within 7-14 days or more promptly, whenever possible.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-07 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary medication. This was identified for one (Resident #166) of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications. Specifically, on 2/20/2024 and again on 3/12/2024, Resident #166's Physician agreed to discontinue Oxybutynin (medication to treat bladder overactivity) and Benadryl (anti-allergy medication) as per the recommendations made by the consultant Pharmacist because the medications were no longer medically required. Resident #166 continued to receive Oxybutynin Extended Release 5 milligrams from 2/20/2024 to 5/5/2024 and received Benadryl Allergy oral tablet 25 milligrams on 3/22/2024, 3/29/2024, 5/4/2024 and 5/5/2024. The finding is: Resident #166 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included an Overactive Bladder, Hyperuricemia (high uric acid level), and Seizures. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-07 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each 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 review and interviews during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY 00331067) Survey initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident received routine dental services to meet the needs of each resident. This was identified for one (Resident #127) of one resident reviewed for Dental Services. Specifically, Resident #127 had a dental consult completed on 3/18/2024. The dental consult documented recommendations for a dental follow-up visit in one week with medical clearance for tooth extraction. There was no documented evidence that the recommendations made by the Dentist were addressed until 5/7/2024. The finding is: The facility's Dental Services policy last revised in December 2023, documented to provide residents with routine and emergency dental services. Residents have the right to select Dentists of their choice when dental care or services are needed. A social services representative will assist residents with appointments and transportation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-07 · 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 review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (Complaint #NY 00337626) initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, the facility did not immediately notify the resident's Designated Representative when there was a significant change in the resident's physical status. This was identified for one (Resident #140) of one resident reviewed for Notification of Change. Specifically, on 3/17/2024 Resident #140 fell and hit their head on a radiator and was identified to have sustained a scalp laceration. Subsequently, the resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation on 3/17/2024. There was no documented evidence that the resident's designated representative was notified of the resident's fall and the resident's transfer to the hospital until 3/19/2024. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Notification of Change created in 12/2021 and revised in 12/2023 documented to notify the resident, their attending physician, and the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-07 · 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
Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Extended Survey (NY 00337759) initiated on 4/29/2024 and completed on 5/7/2024, the facility did not ensure that a physician wrote, signed, and dated a progress note at each visit. This was identified for one (Resident #126) of two residents reviewed for Hospitalization. Specifically, on 3/17/2024 Resident #126 reported experiencing stroke-like symptoms. Physician #1 examined the resident but did not document the examination findings in the resident's medical record. Subsequently, the resident was transferred to the hospital after the resident's family activated emergency medical services and was diagnosed with a possible acute Cerebral Vascular Insufficiency. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Physician Services last revised 5/3/2024, documented an alternate physician supervises the care of residents when the attending physician is not available. Physician orders and progress notes are maintained in accordance with Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act regulations and facility policy. Physician…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-07 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (Complaint # NY 00339556) initiated on [DATE] completed on [DATE], the facility did not ensure that all residents were provided medically-related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable well-being. This was identified for one (Resident #380) of one Resident reviewed for Hospice and End of Life. Specifically, Resident #380 was admitted to the facility with a deteriorating health condition due to a diagnosis of Cancer. On [DATE] (Saturday) upon request of Resident #380's designated representative the Physician wrote an order to obtain a Hospice service referral. The facility's Social Worker or designee was not available to request the physician-ordered Hospice service referral until Monday ([DATE]). Resident #380 expired on [DATE] shortly after the referral to the Hospice services was made. The finding is: The facility Social Services policy and procedure revised on 12/2023 documented that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-07 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (NY 00339556) initiated on [DATE] and completed on [DATE], the facility did not ensure that all residents were assisted with the provision of Hospice services when a resident requested a transfer. This was identified for one (Resident #380) of one Resident reviewed for Hospice and End of Life. Specifically, Resident #380's designated representative requested Hospice services on [DATE] and a referral was not provided until [DATE]. Resident #380 expired on [DATE] shortly after the referral to the Hospice services was made. The finding is: The facility Comfort Care and Palliative Care policy and procedure revised on 12/2023 documented it is the policy of the facility to respect the wishes of the residents and their designated representatives regarding end-of-life decisions. The policy documented that the interdisciplinary team explores Hospice where appropriate. The facility does not provide in-house Hospice service. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-08-09 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, conducted during the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/2/2022 and completed on 8/9/2022, the facility did not ensure that the facility's medication error rates are not five percent or greater. This was identified for 15 of 25 opportunities during a medication pass observation resulting in a 60% medication error rate. Specifically, 1) Resident #109 did not receive the Physician ordered 9 AM medications until 12:20 PM. 2) Resident #433 did not receive the Physician ordered 9 AM medications until 12:50 PM. 3) Resident # 150 did not receive the Physician ordered 9 AM medications until 1 PM. The findings are: The Facility's Policy for Administering Medications dated 2/1/2021, documented medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. The Policy documented medications are administered within one hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified (for example, before and after meal). 1) Resident #109 was admitted with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-08-09 · 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 review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey and abbreviated survey (NY 00297469 and NY 00290555) initiated on 8/02/2022 completed on 8/9/2022 the facility did not ensure that for each resident the resident's representative or physician were notified immediately when there was a change in condition. This was identified for 1 (Resident #432) of 3 residents reviewed for change of condition and one (Resident #483) of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, 1) Resident #432 developed an infection and required Intravenous (IV) antibiotics; however, the resident's representative was not notified of initiation of the IV antibiotic therapy for the resident. 2) Resident #483 had a Physician order to contact the Physician if Resident # 483's finger stick (FS) blood sugar (BS) results were less than 70 milligram/deciliter (mg/dL) or greater than 250 mg/dL. There was no documented evidence that Resident # 483's Physician was notified when the resident's Blood Sugar level was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-08-09 · 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 observations, record review, and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/2/2022 and completed on 8/9/2022 the facility did not ensure that each resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 (Resident #83) of 6 residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers; and 2 of 10 Resident Council attendees (Resident #127 and Resident #118) who complained of not receiving wound care treatments consistently. Specifically, 1) Resident #83 was identified with an open area to the left lateral Malleolus (outer ankle) on 7/15/2022. There was no assessment or treatment provided until six days later on 7/21/2022; however, the assessment did not include the size, depth, or type of wound until 7/27/2022 when the resident was seen by the wound care Physician. Additionally, the Physician's order for bilateral heel booties to be worn while in bed was not implemented on two separate observations. Furthermore,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-08-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review during the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/2/2022 and completed on 8/9/2022, the facility did not ensure that all residents received adequate supervision to prevent Accidents. This was identified for one (Resident #7) of five residents reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #7, who required extensive assistance of one person for personal hygiene, was observed shaving themselves with a razor without supervision. The finding is: The Facility's Hazardous Area, Devices and Equipment Policy dated 4/24/2022, documented all hazardous devices in the facility will be identified and addressed appropriately to ensure resident safety and mitigate accident hazards. A hazard is defined as anything in the environment that has the potential to cause injury or illness. Examples of environmental hazards include but are not limited to sharp objects that are accessible to vulnerable residents. The Facility Safety and Supervision of Residents Policy dated 4/24/2022,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-08-09 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated survey (NY00280683) initiated on 8/2/2022 and completed on 8/9/2022 the facility did not promptly notify the ordering physician of laboratory results that fell outside of clinical reference ranges in accordance with facility policies and procedures for notification of a practitioner or per the ordering physician's order. This was identified for 1 (Resident #582) of 3 residents reviewed for change in condition. Specifically, Resident #582 had Urine Analysis and Culture and Sensitivity (UA and CS) report results that were outside of clinical reference ranges; however, there was no documented evidence that these results were reviewed either by the physician or the nursing staff prior to the resident being sent to the hospital. The resident was diagnosed in the hospital with a Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) diagnosis. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Laboratory and Diagnostic Test Results-Clinical Protocol, dated 2/1/2021, documented when test results are reported to the facility, a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-08-09 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview during the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/2/2022 and completed on 8/9/2022, the facility did not ensure that the facility assessment included what resources are necessary to care for its residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies. Specifically, the facility assessment did not include the overall number of facility staff needed to ensure that a sufficient number of qualified nursing staff are available to meet each resident's needs. The finding is: The facility assessment dated [DATE] documented that the staffing plan was based on the resident population and their needs for care/support. The staffing plan portion of the facility assessment documented that the number of hours in a two-week period for licensed nurses providing direct care was 4,040 and 8,184 hours for nurse aides. The Administrator was interviewed on 8/9/22 at 11:31 AM. The administrator stated that the facility assessment documented only the number of working hours for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2025-11-19 · tag F0847 — widespreadInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 09/11/2025 and completed on 09/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that residents and their representatives had a full understanding of arbitration agreements. This was identified for four (Residents #14, #24, #15, and #131) of the four residents reviewed for the Arbitration task. Specifically, interviews with Residents #14, #24, #15, and a representative for Resident #131 all stated they were not aware that they had accepted an arbitration agreement and did not have a full understanding of the agreement.The finding is:The facility's policy titled Binding Arbitration, dated 11/05/2024, documented residents or representatives are informed of the nature and implications of any proposed binding arbitration agreement so as to make informed decisions on whether to enter into such agreements. The terms and conditions of a binding arbitration agreement are explained to the resident or representative in a way that ensures understanding…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2022-08-09 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 8/2/2022 and completed on 8/9/2022 the facility did not ensure that completed Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were electronically transmitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) within 14 days as required. This was identified for 3 (Resident #1, #2, and #3) of 3 residents reviewed for the Resident Assessment Facility Task. Specifically, Resident #1's Medicare 5-day MDS assessment was not electronically transmitted to CMS until 19 days after completion of the assessment; Resident #2's Significant Change in Status MDS assessment was not electronically submitted to CMS until 32 days after completion of the assessment; Resident #3's Admission/5-day MDS assessment was not electronically submitted to CMS until 21 days after completion of the assessment. The findings are: The facility MDS Completion and Submission Timeframes policy dated 2/10/2021 documented that timeframes for completion and submission 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CARERITE CENTERS — 34 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 33 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EINHORN, NEAL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | 44% | since 08/10/2017 |
| FRIEDMAN, MARK | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | 44% | since 08/10/2017 |
| RUDNER, AKIVA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2019 |
| SAX, STEVEN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 08/10/2017 |
| ABTAN, YITZCHAK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/06/2023 |
| RIAZ, FAHAD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| UWECHUE, AUGUSTA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/08/2023 |
| ZUCKER, YOSSIE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/10/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $7.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NY
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335211. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-19, 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.