Autumn View Health Care Facility L L C

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.

58.1% 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 371 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 203 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 0.58 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 87% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 230 beds and averages 222.0 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.37 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.90 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 2.91 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% 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.

• Potential for harm · D2026-03-13 · 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, interview and record reviewed conducted during a survey, the facility did not ensure that all residents care plans were implemented as planned, consistent with resident's rights and meet their preferences, goals and medical, physical, and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for one (1) (Resident #222) of two (2) resident's reviewed. Specifically, Resident #222 was observed with numerous cigarettes in their possession and they were care planned for all smoking materials to be kept at the nurse's station. The finding is: The policy titled Resident Smoking Policy dated 01/2025 documented the unit Social Worker will complete the Smoking Data Collection tool quarterly and with any significant change to determine whether a resident is deemed responsible or non-responsible and what restrictions if any needed to be placed on the resident's smoking privileges. All restrictions shall be noted on the smoking care plan so all personnel may be alert to smoking restrictions. The facility will receive consent from the resident or the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-13 · 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 interview and record review conducted a survey, the facility did not ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing for one (1) (Resident #258) of four (4) residents reviewed. Specifically, when Resident #258 was readmitted to the facility with pressure ulcers there was a delay in obtaining a full assessment of the pressure ulcers, including measurements and staging. The finding is:The policy titled Documentation of Pressure Ulcer and Chronic Wounds, last revised 06/2023, documented pressure ulcers and chronic wounds were monitored closely to monitor effectiveness of treatment and change in risk factors. Risk factors would be identified, monitored and documented on the Skin Risk Data Collection Tool, upon admission and whenever there was a change in condition. The Assistant Director of Nursing (or skin nurse as designated by the Director of Nursing) would be the official baseline and subsequent…

  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 · D2024-02-12 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review conducted during a Complaint investigation (#NY00328230) during a Standard survey completed on 2/12/24, the facility did not ensure that a resident has the right to refuse treatment for one (Resident #137) of six residents reviewed for immunizations. Specifically, Resident #137's Health Care Proxy did not give consent for a COVID 19 vaccine, and the resident received it. The finding is: Review of the policy and procedure titled COVID 19 Vaccination dated 10/19/23 documented that residents or their representatives will be educated regarding the risks, benefits, contraindications, and potential side effects associated with the COVID 19 vaccine. Further review of the policy documented that residents or the residents' representatives must have verbal or written consent prior to receiving the vaccine. Resident #137 was admitted to the facility with cancer of the frontal lobe of the brain, dementia, and dysphagia (difficulty in swallowing food or drink). Review of the Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) dated 9/15/23 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-03-22 · 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 interview conducted during the Standard survey completed on 3/22/22, the facility did not ensure that New York SCREEN Forms DOH (Department of Health) - 695 were completed as required. One (Resident #119) of one resident reviewed with mental retardation/developmental disabilities (MR/DD) diagnosis did not have a Level II evaluation completed as required. The finding is: Resident #119 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy (disorder that affects a person's ability to move), intellectual disabilities, and calculus of kidney (kidney stone). Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and was not considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability. The facility policy Pre-admission Screening & Resident Review (PASRR) dated 11/18 documented a resident who was identified as having mental retardation/developmental disability…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-03-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide 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 observation, interview and record review conducted during the Standard survey completed on 3/22/22, the facility did not ensure that each resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADL) receives the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene for two (Residents #119 and 92) of five residents reviewed for ADLs. Specifically, Resident (#119) was not provided with complete AM ADL care including washing of their underarms, hands and perineal area and Resident (#92) was not provided timely incontinence care. Additionally, barrier cream was not applied following incontinence care (#119) and staff did not complete hand hygiene in-between glove change after incontinence care (#92). The findings are: The facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Bathing and Grooming revised 2/2019 documented a partial bed bath (AM Care) included washing the resident's face, neck, underarms and under breasts. Also, to wash the resident's genitals, buttocks, and apply A&D ointment (skin…

  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 · D2022-03-22 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  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, observation, and record review conducted during a Complaint investigation (Complaint #NY00281755) completed during the Standard survey on 3/22/22, the facility did not ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for two residents (#298 and #184) of four residents reviewed for indwelling catheters (tubing put into a patient's urethra to collect urine from their bladder). Specifically, the lack of adhering to professional standards of practice and infection prevention and control practices. This included the lack proper hand hygiene and glove change during catheter care (#298) and a catheter drainage bag and tubing that were observed directly on the floor during multiple observations (#184). Both residents had urinary tract infections. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Policy on Hand Washing dated 11/2019 documented that all…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-03-22 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review completed during the Standard survey completed on 3/22/22, the facility did not ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means (method of feeding that uses the gastrointestinal (GI) tract to deliver part or all of a person's caloric requirements) receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent possible complications for one (Resident #48) of two residents reviewed for feeding tubes. Specifically, the facility did not administer the tube feed formula at the flow rate as ordered by the physician. In addition, the nursing staff documented the formula was administered as ordered. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Gastrostomy Feeding Tubes revised 8/2017 documented that the purpose was to provide nourishment, hydration, and medication for residents requiring feeding through a gastric tube (g-tube) inserted into the stomach through the abdominal wall when the oral route is inaccessible and/or medically contraindicated. The procedure included that the nurse was to obtain a physician order for 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.

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE MCGUIRE GROUP — 6 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

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $23K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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