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

Nassau Rehabilitation & Nursing Center

One Greenwich Street, Hempstead, NY 11550 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 280 certified beds · (516) 565-4800 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 immediate-jeopardy citation$16,153 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (14% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $16,153 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-28)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 17% 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
129 Jackson St · (516) 538-4531 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
126 Jackson St · (516) 483-2800 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
67 James A. Garner Way · (516) 500-9235 · Call to confirm hours
Park
99 Nichols Ct · (516) 478-6246 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.7%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.0%5.8%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms96.0%19.5%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.4%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened9.3%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.5%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.5%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.3%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.1%19.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.7%13.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.5%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine61.3%78.8%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission18.2%20.6%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.3%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.001.701.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.021.361.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

55.7% 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 128 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

55.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.9% 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 159 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF55.7%CMS range 43.7–65.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.5–13.010.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge57.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge47.2%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge44.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified5.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting81.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.1%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened6.4%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 5.1–10.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.881.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.27
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.14
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.11
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.11
RN hoursweekends
13.6%
Total nursing turnover
11.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 280 beds and averages 279.8 residents a day — about 100% occupied, or roughly 0 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.14 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 2.86 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.21 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.34 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 14% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-28)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-23)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-05-08 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
    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, staff interview and record review during an abbreviated survey (NY00373760), the facility failed to ensure food was prepared in a form designed to meet the resident's needs as documented on a hospital discharge summary for one (1) (Resident #1) of three (3) residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #1 was admitted with a modified consistency diet of minced moist consistency and thickened liquids. The facility diet order documented chopped consistency with thin liquids. Resident # 1 was found unresponsive in the dining room during breakfast on 09/10/2024. This resulted in Resident #1 being transported to the hospital with upper airway obstruction from food and subsequently expired. This deficient practice has the potential to affect all 102 residents in the facility with a modified consistency diet that is Immediate Jeopardy. The finding is: Facility policy and procedure titled Transmission of Diet Orders for New admission dated 01/01/2024, documented nursing staff will review Patient…

    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 · D2025-04-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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 4/21/2025 and completed on 4/28/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident was treated with respect and dignity and cared for in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life. This was identified for two (Resident #78 and Resident #155) of the two residents reviewed for Dignity. Specifically, during a lunch meal observation on 4/21/2025, Occupational Therapist Assistant #1 was observed standing over Resident #78 while they assisted the resident with the lunch meal. During the same lunch meal observation, Transporter #1 was also observed standing over Resident #155 while they assisted the resident with their lunch meal. The findings are: The undated facility's policy titled Assistance with Meals, documented that residents who cannot feed themselves will be fed with attention to safety, comfort, and dignity, for example, not standing over residents while assisting them 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · 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

    Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/21/2025 and completed on 4/28/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. This was identified for one (Resident #232) of one resident reviewed for Bowel and Bladder Incontinence. Specifically, Resident #232's room was observed with a strong urine smell. Staff Interviews and record review revealed the resident did not receive staff assistance with incontinence care and assistance with personal hygiene as per the resident's plan of care. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Activities of Daily Living, dated 10/1/2024, documented to provide Activities of Daily Living care to all residents based on assessment of needs. Activities of Daily Living care consists of but is not limited to bathing, dressing, eating, transfers, toileting, bed mobility, and ambulation. The purpose is to ensure all residents' needs are met in…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ddisputed · IDR2025-04-28 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/21/2025 and completed on 4/28/2025, the facility did not ensure that residents received care consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing, prevent infections, and prevent new ulcers from developing. This was identified for two (Resident #176 and Resident#196) of four residents reviewed for Skin Conditions. Specifically, 1) Resident #176 had a history of a pressure ulcer to the mid-back and utilized an air mattress for pressure relief. During multiple observations, Resident #176 was observed in bed with their air mattress weight setting at 450 pounds. Resident #176 weighed 114.4 pounds on 4/02/2025. 2) Resident #196 required the use of an air mattress to decrease the risk of skin breakdown. The resident was provided a bariatric air mattress, as that was the only air mattress available at the time the need for the air mattress was determined for Reisdnet #196. During multiple observations,…

    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 · D2025-04-28 · 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 staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/21/2025 and completed on 4/28/2025, the facility did not ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in a locked compartment. This was identified for one (Resident #28) of five residents reviewed for Accident Hazards. Specifically, Resident #28 was observed with an unlabeled, clear bottle of Safetussin Cough and Chest Congestion (medication for cough and congestion) on their nightstand with no nursing staff within the vicinity of Resident #28's room. Additionally, there was no Physician's Order for the Safetussin Cough and Chest Congestion medication, and Resident #28 was not assessed to self-administer medications. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Storage Medications, last revised on 3/25/2024, documented that Medications are stored in an orderly manner in cabinets, drawers, or carts of sufficient size to prevent crowding. All medications, including treatment items, are stored in a locked…

    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 · D2025-04-28 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolated
    Conduct 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 interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 4/21/2025 and completed on 4/28/2025, the facility did not ensure its Facility Assessment considered specific staffing needs for each resident unit in the facility and for each shift, such as day, evening, and night. This was identified during the Sufficient and Competent Nurse Staffing Review Task. Specifically, the Facility Assessment, last updated on 3/5/2025, did not specify the number of Certified Nursing Assistants and Licensed Practical Nurses required to care for the resident population. Additionally, the facility assessment staffing plan did not specify the nursing staffing needs per unit per shift. The finding is: The facility's undated policy titled Facility Assessment documented that the facility assessment is conducted annually to determine and update the capacity to meet the needs of and competently care for our residents during day-to-day operations. Once a year, and as needed, a designated team conducts 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/16/2024 and completed on 1/23/2024 the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents. This was identified for one (Resident #26) of three residents reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #26 was assessed as a high risk for falls, required extensive assistance of one person for transfers and toileting needs, and was to be placed in a high visibility area when awake as per the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan. On multiple occasions, the resident was observed going into the bathroom unassisted in their room to toilet themselves. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Certified Nursing Assistant Accountability Record dated 11/16/2023, documented the certified nursing assistant reviews nursing instructions for each resident before providing care; in accordance with the plan of care, provides the necessary assistance the resident requires with each activity 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-23 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/16/2024 and completed on 1/23/2024, the facility did not ensure that each resident who is fed by enteral means received treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral (tube) feeding including but not limited to aspiration pneumonia and vomiting. This was identified for one (Resident #184) of one resident reviewed for Tube Feeding. Specifically, Resident (#184), who was fed by enteral means, had a Physician's order to elevate the head of the bed at a 45-degree angle during and one hour after the tube feeding. Resident #184 was observed lying flat on their back 45 minutes after receiving the bolus (administration of a limited volume of enteral formula over a brief period) feeding. In addition, Licensed Practical Nurse #2 did not administer the enteral feeding to Resident #184 at the time prescribed by their physician. The finding is: The facility Policy and Procedure titled, Tube Feeding last 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-23 · tag F0710 — isolated
    Obtain 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/16/2024 and completed on 1/23/2024, the facility did not ensure that the medical care of each resident was supervised by the Physician, including monitoring changes in the resident's medical status. This was identified for one (Resident #75) of four residents reviewed for Nutrition. Specifically, Resident #75 had an 8.5% significant weight loss in 30 days identified in November 2023. The significant weight loss was not addressed by the resident's Primary Care Physician or Nurse Practitioner in the resident's Electronic Medical Record. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Weight Protocol Policy and Procedure last reviewed on 8/23/2023 documented the Registered Nurses/Charge Nurses were responsible for obtaining weights for newly admitted or readmitted residents within 24 hours of their admission and obtaining a Physician's Order for weekly weights for four weeks and then monthly. The weights will be written in…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-23 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/16/2024 and completed on 1/23/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents who have not used psychotropic drugs are not given these drugs unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record. This was identified for one (Resident #75) of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications. Specifically, Resident #75 was started on Risperdal (Risperidone-an antipsychotic medication) on 8/21/2023 in an attempt to reduce the resident's non-compliant behavior of refusing to take their medications which is not the appropriate indication for the use of Risperdal. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Psychoactive Medications last reviewed on 2/2023 documented to use psychoactive medications for residents who require psychoactive medications for various reasons such as Psychosis, Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder, Depression, Anxiety, Mood…

    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 · Dcited before2021-12-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification survey completed on 12/21/2021, the facility did not ensure that each resident environment remained free from accident hazards. This was identified for one (Resident #124) of seven residents reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #124's room was observed with sharp metal that was protruding out of the heating/ventilation unit. The finding is: The Facility Environmental Maintenance Policy reviewed on 11/28/2021 documented that all staff should report any issues regarding equipment that may need repair to the Maintenance Director, so the problem can be addressed in a timely manner. Resident #124 was admitted with diagnoses including Depression and Hypertension. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated Resident #124 had intact cognition. The MDS documented Resident #124 required extensive assistance of two staff members for walking in…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-12-21 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey completed on 12/21/2021, the facility did not ensure that each resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice and their comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was identified for one (Resident # 494) of one resident reviewed for Respiratory care. Specifically, Resident #494 was observed receiving oxygen at a flow rate of 4 liters per minute (L/min) via a nasal cannula (tubing used to deliver supplemental oxygen) without a Physician's order. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure for oxygen, revised in October 2020 documented to ensure there is a Physician's order for oxygen use. Resident #494 was admitted with the diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Hypertension. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of one which indicated the resident had severely…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-12-21 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — isolated
    Ensure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
    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 the Recertification Survey and the Abbreviated Survey (Complaint #NY00259905) completed on 12/21/2021, the facility did not ensure there was no more than 14 hours between a substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day for one (Resident #88) of 5 residents reviewed for Food and Nutrition. Specifically, Resident #88 verbalized that the time between dinner and breakfast next morning was too long and they (Resident #88) did not consistently get a midnight snack and felt hungry at night. The finding is: An undated document titled Meal Delivery documented the mealtimes were approximate to when the trays/meals would arrive on the 3rd floor: Supper: Unit 3 North: 5:00 PM Unit 3 South: 5:30 PM Breakfast: Unit 3 North: 8:00 AM Unit 3 South: 8:30 AM The mealtimes for the units on the third floor included a lapse of 15-hours between the evening and breakfast meals the following day. Resident #88 was admitted with diagnoses including Low Back Pain,…

    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
  • No harm found · C2021-12-21 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interviews during the Recertification Survey completed on 12/21/2021, the facility did not make staffing information readily available to residents and visitors. Specifically, daily staffing was not observed posted in a prominent area in the facility on 12/16/2021. The finding is: During a tour of the facility on 12/16/2021 from 10:35 AM to 10:45 AM the Nursing Staffing information was not observed posted at a prominent area in the facility including the entrance lobby, receptionist desk, and the elevators. The Staffing Coordinator was interviewed on 12/16/2021 at 11:50 AM and stated they (staffing coordinator) were not aware of the requirement to post the daily nursing staffing in a prominent area that was accessible to residents and visitors at all times. The Director of Nursing Services (DNS) was interviewed on 12/16/2021 at 1:07 PM and stated that the daily nursing staffing should be posted in an area that was accessible to everyone. The DNS expected that the staffing coordinator would post the daily nursing staffing during the day shift. During 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services 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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$16,153 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $16,153 — penalty dated 2025-04-28

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 EXCELSIOR CARE GROUP — 33 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.5+0.5 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 32 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Ambassador Healthcare At College ParkFort Myers, FL 1 of 5Briarcliff Manor Center For Rehab And Nursing CareBriarcliff Manor, NY 1 of 5Charlotte Bay Rehab And Care CenterPort Charlotte, FL 1 of 5Live Oak Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenterLive Oak, FL 1 of 5Melbourne Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenterMelbourne, FL 1 of 5River Front Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterPennsauken, NJ 1 of 5Space Coast Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenterMerritt Island, FL 1 of 5West Delray Nursing & Rehab CenterDelray Beach, FL 2 of 5Alliance Care Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterIrvington, NJ 2 of 5Azure Shores RehabMiami, FL 2 of 5Beach Breeze Rehab And Care CenterWest Palm Beach, FL 2 of 5Boca Circle Rehabilitation CenterBoca Raton, FL 2 of 5Breezy Hills Rehab And Care CenterLakeland, FL 2 of 5Charming Lakes RehabLakeland, FL 2 of 5Lake City Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenterLake City, FL 2 of 5Lake Eustis Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenterEustis, FL 2 of 5Seagate Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterBrooklyn, NY 2 of 5West Volusia Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenterDeltona, FL 2 of 5Yamato Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterBoca Raton, FL 3 of 5Arnold Walter Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterHazlet, NJ 3 of 5Heartland Nursing & Rehab CenterBoynton Beach, FL 3 of 5Palm Beach Nursing CenterLake Worth, FL 3 of 5Throgs Neck Rehabilitation & Nursing CenterBronx, NY 4 of 5Acclaim Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterJersey City, NJ 4 of 5Adroit Care Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterRahway, NJ 4 of 5Anchor Care and Rehabilitation CenterHazlet, NJ 4 of 5Atrium Center for Rehabilitation and NursingBrooklyn, NY 4 of 5Isles Of Boynton Nursing And Rehab CenterBoynton Beach, FL 4 of 5Sun Harbor HealthcarePort Charlotte, FL 4 of 5Victoria Crossing Rehabilitation CenterBrandon, FL 5 of 5Cypress Garden Center for Nursing and RehabilitatiFlushing, NY 5 of 5Staten Island Care CenterStaten Island, NY

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
ESTATE OF MAYER RISPLEROrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
GEORGE KLEIN TESTAMENTARY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
BECHER, AARONIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
BLOOM, DAVIDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
BUSELL, SANDRAIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
CHOPP, ALANIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
FARKOWITZ, ESTHERIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF7%since 01/01/2025
KLEIN, LARRYIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
LEIFER, JOELIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF43%since 01/01/2025
LERNER, CHANAIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
NAKDIMEN, SHELLYIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
PHILIPSON, BENTIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
POCCHIA, TERESAIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
POLLAK, THEODOREIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
SCHWARTZ, MICHAELIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
SINGER, BRUCHAIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
STERN, RONALDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
TESSLER, NAOMIIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
EXCELSIOR CARE GROUPOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/12/2019
FISCHEL, MAYERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
ALI, ALEEMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2022
AWENDSTERN, HENNYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/28/2014
BLOBSTEIN, JACOBIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/31/2022
HERSH, ISAACIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/22/2019
STEINBERG, MOSHEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/12/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 25 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.

$47.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$7.7M
Related-party expense17% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 68%Medicare 15%Other / private 17%

This home reported $7.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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

$468per resident / day
operating cost
$14,218per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$480per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in NY

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in New York
$15,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,110/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335787. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-28, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next