Highfield Gardens Care Center of Great Neck

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

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.

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.

49.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 398 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 74.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 140 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 83% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 33% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 200 beds and averages 196.6 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 3 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 3.80 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.59 is at or above 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 3.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.09 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-02-03 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  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 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025, the facility did not ensure each resident was served food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature. This was identified for ten (Resident #83, Resident #111, Resident # 33, Resident # 52, Resident #53, Resident #20, Resident #18, Resident #164, Resident #118, and Resident #171) of ten residents during the Resident Council meeting. Specifically, during the Resident Council meeting held on 1/29/2025, ten of the ten residents in attendance complained of hot food being served at cold temperatures. On 1/30/2025, during the lunch meal service, one (Unit 3 North) of three units' meal temperatures for the hot food items were recorded below 135 degrees Fahrenheit. The finding is: The facility's undated policy titled Food Preparation and Service documented that time and temperature-sensitive foods including meats, poultry, seafood, cut melon,…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025, the facility did not follow proper sanitation practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness and did not distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was identified during the Kitchen and Dining task. Specifically, 1) during the kitchen observation on 1/28/2025, the rinse temperature of the high-temperature dishmachine was observed to be below 180 degrees Fahrenheit. The manufacturer's temperature recommendation for the rinse cycle was 180 degrees Fahrenheit and above. Additionally, the facility did not monitor the rinse and wash cycle temperatures of the dishmachine. 2) On 1/30/2025, during the lunch meal service on Unit 3 North, the hot food temperatures for the lunch meal were recorded below 135 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, the cold food item temperatures were recorded above 41 degrees Fahrenheit on three (Unit 1 North, Unit 2 South, and Unit 3 North) of three units. This is 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-02-03 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  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 initiated on 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025 the facility did not maintain an effective pest control program. This was identified for two (Unit 2 South and Unit 3 North) of five units observed during the Environmental Task. Specifically, a cockroach was observed at the 2 South nursing station on 1/28/2025. Additionally, all residents (10 of 10) in the resident council meeting confirmed the sighting of cockroaches throughout the facility and had concerns about pest control. The finding is: A facility policy titled, Pest Control, dated July 2018 documented it is the responsibility of the Maintenance Department to coordinate the control of pests with a company engaged in the business of providing Pest Control Services. The pest control logs for November 2024, December 2024, and January 2025 documented requests for the treatment of roaches on Unit 3 North. A review of pest control treatment invoices from 11/14/2024 to 1/4/2025 revealed cockroach gel treatments were provided on multiple…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR 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 record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025, the facility did not ensure that accurate preadmission screening for individuals with a mental disorder and individuals with intellectual disability was accurately conducted. This was identified for one (Resident #69) of 37 residents reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR). Specifically, Resident #69 did not have a complete Level 1 screen and was missing the screener identification number. The finding is: The facility's policy and procedure titled Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) last revised on 11/16/2023 documented that the admission department/designee will obtain a Screen and Level I Referral prior to a resident's admission to the facility. Level I screen is required for all applicants to determine whether they might have Serious Mental Illness (SMI) or Intellectual Disability (ID) and/or related disorders. Resident #69 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey, initiated on 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025, the facility did not ensure that it implemented a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. This was identified for one (Resident #337) of three residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers. Specifically, Resident #337 had a physician's order to wear bilateral (both extremities) heel booties at all times. During multiple observations, the resident was not wearing the physician-ordered heel booties. The finding is: The facility's policy, titled Care Planning Process and Care Conference, dated 7/2023, documented the care plan is a working tool that provides a profile of the needs of the individual resident; the resident care plan will be available for use by staff caring for the resident. The care plan includes initial needs/problems such as falls, skin tears, risk for skin breakdown, nutritional status, behaviors,…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  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 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025 the facility did not ensure each resident received care, consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers from developing, promote healing, and prevent infections. This was identified for two (Resident #26 and Resident #38) of three residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers. Specifically, 1) Resident #26 had a physician's order for an Air Mattress. The facility did not provide the resident with an air mattress as per the physician's orders. 2) Resident #38 with Stage 3 pressure ulcers (a full-thickness skin loss where the underlying fat tissue is visible within the wound but without exposing muscle, tendon, or bone) on the sacrum (bone located at the base of the spine) and the left buttock had a Physician's Order for an air mattress. Resident #38 weighed 150 pounds; however, during multiple observations, the air mattress weight setting 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/28/2025 and completed on 2/3/2025, the facility did not ensure that all medications and biologicals were stored properly and labeled in accordance with currently accepted principles. This was identified for one (Resident #35) of seven residents reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, one inhaler of Albuterol Sulfate was observed in Resident #35's room on their nightstand without a nurse in the vicinity. The Albuterol Sulfate inhaler was not labeled with Resident #35's name. The finding is: Resident #35 was admitted with diagnoses that included Asthma, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, and Hypertension. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #35 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating the resident had intact cognition. The Minimum Data Set documented Resident #35 did not have shortness of breath. The physician's orders dated 1/21/2025 revealed no evidence…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/3/2023 and completed on 4/11/2023, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was identified during the initial tour of the kitchen on 4/3/2023. Specifically, 12 unopened boxes of food including raw chicken drumsticks, raw fresh ground beef, and cooked turkey breast were observed placed on the patio outside the front entrance of the facility. These boxes of food were observed to be left during multiple observations between 11:16 AM and 2:06 PM when the outside temperature was between 50 to 53 degrees Fahrenheit. The finding is: The facility's undated policy on Food Service documented that every effort is made to ensure all foods are safely received, stored, prepared, and served. The policy did not include guidance related to temperatures that fresh and frozen foods are to be stored at to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness. During an initial tour of the kitchen on…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-04-11 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide 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 interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/3/2023 and completed on 4/11/2023, the facility did not ensure that each resident maintained, to the extent possible, acceptable parameters of nutritional and hydration status. This was identified for two (Resident #156 and Resident #142) of five residents reviewed for Nutrition. Specifically, 1) Resident #156 had a 7% significant weight loss in eight days, identified in June 2022, which was not addressed by the Registered Dietitian (RD). 2) Resident #142 was identified with a significant weight loss of 12.7 pounds (lbs) from 3/14/2023 to 3/28/2023; however, there was no dietary assessment nor dietary interventions put in place until 4/3/2023. The findings are: The facility's policy titled, Weight Policy and Procedure last reviewed in 4/2023 documented that the RD would review the medical record of residents with significant weight changes (i.e. 5% loss/gain in one month, 7.5% loss/gain in 3 months, 10% loss/gain in 6 months).…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-04-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/3/2023 and completed on 4/11/2023 the facility did not ensure that each resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences. This was identified for one (Resident #176) of four residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. Specifically, Resident #176 had an order for continuous oxygen administration within a range of 2-4 liters per minutes (lpm); however, the resident was observed without supplemental oxygen administration on multiple occasions. There were no physician's orders or parameters established regarding when to administer 2 liters oxygen, 3 liters of oxygen, or 4 liters of oxygen. Additionally, Resident #176's oxygen tubing was observed without a label indicating when the oxygen tubing was last replaced, and facility staff were not knowledgeable of the time frames of when to change the oxygen tubing. The finding is: The facility's policy,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$4,922 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $1,748 — penalty dated 2023-10-10
• $3,174 — penalty dated 2023-09-18

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to JONATHAN BLEIER — 18 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 →

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

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 $2.4M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NY