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

Wells Rehabilitation and Nursing Center

201 W Madison Avenue, Johnstown, NY 12095 · Non profit - Corporation · 100 certified beds · (518) 762-4546 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuse2 actual-harm citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$8,512 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2026
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $8,512 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-12)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
23 S Perry St · (518) 736-1500 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
40 W Main St · (518) 762-4227 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
41 W State St · (518) 762-2990 · Call to confirm hours
Park
N William St @ W Main St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1 W Montgomery St · (518) 762-7924

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 fell from 2 to 1 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 rating1★
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 increased15.8%14.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.7%5.8%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.2%0.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.5%1.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.4%19.5%6.5%better 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 injury6.3%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.5%12.5%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.6%13.2%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.4%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.9%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control35.0%19.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table27.5%13.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.0%78.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.8%20.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.3%9.6%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.671.701.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.981.361.80typical

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.

42.2% 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 47 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

42.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
54.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.18U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 54.3% 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 35 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF42.2%CMS range 32.6–54.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.1%CMS range 5.7–16.110.7%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 discharge54.3%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 discharge45.7%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 discharge54.3%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 identified70.5%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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 stay2.3%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 worsened2.3%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 hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.7–11.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.791.02Oct 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

0.33
RN hours/ resident / day
0.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.12
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.23
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.14
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 93.3 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.23 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.62 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-09-12)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2021-10-27)

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

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

  • Actual harm · Gcited beforedisputed · IDR2026-03-03 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a survey, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for one (1) (Resident #1) of three (3) residents reviewed for abuse. On 02/04/2026, Resident #1 became combative during a shower, striking Certified Nurse Aide #2. Certified Nurse Aides #1 and #2 continued to provide shower care. Certified Nurse Aide #1 stated they continued the care and tried to deflect some of the blows toward Certified Nurse Aide #2. Resident #1 sustained injuries including skin tears, scattered bruising to right arm, hematoma (a localized collection of clotted or partially clotted blood outside blood vessels, often resulting from injury or trauma) on the back of head, a head laceration (cut), and a bruised left ankle. This resulted in actual harm of Resident #1 that is not Immediate Jeopardy and is past non-compliance. This is evidenced by:Resident #1 was admitted with the diagnoses of unspecified dementia (a group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking, and social abilities), chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure (when 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated survey (Case #NY00338006), the facility did not ensure the resident's right to be free from neglect for 1 (Resident #48) of 18 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. Specifically, on 4/03/2024, Certified Nurse Aide #2 did not use two-person assist for bed mobility as required in Resident #48's Comprehensive Care Plan while providing care to the resident. Resident #48 rolled out of bed onto the floor. Resident #48 sustained a pelvis fracture (a break of the bony structure of the pelvis). This resulted in actual harm that was not immediate jeopardy. This is evidenced by: Resident #48 was admitted with diagnoses of pulmonary edema (fluid collection in the chest cavity causing breathing difficulty), legal blindness, and chronic kidney disease (dysfunction of kidneys that never gets better). The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 8/10/2024 documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment, could be understood, and…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-12 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents and/or their designated representative were fully informed of their right to an expedited review of a service termination for 2 of 3 residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure 2 (Residents #141 and #142) who received Medicare Part A services, received timely notification (2-day notification) of the termination of services with the required form Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage, Form CMS 10123-NOMNC. This is evidenced by: There was no documented evidence that residents #141 and #142 received 2-day notification prior to the termination of rehabilitative services. During an interview on 9/06/2024 at 11:34 AM, Fiscal Clerk #1 stated that they could not account as to why residents #141 and #142 did not receive a 2-day notification prior to the termination of Medicare services. During an interview on 9/06/2024 at 11:37 AM, Administrator #1 stated that the Fiscal Clerk would be re-educated on the 2-day notification. 10 New York Codes, Rules and Regulations…

    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 · D2024-09-12 · 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, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, opened medications had no open and/or expiration dates for 1 (2nd floor medication cart) of 2 medication carts reviewed. This is evidenced by: The facility's Medication Storage and Expiration of Medications policy revised on 6/2018 documented, once any medication or biological product was opened, follow manufacturer/supplier guidelines with respect to expiration dates for opened medications. Record the date opened on the medication container when the medication had a shortened expiration date once opened. Record calculated expiration date based on date opened on the medication container. The facility's Medication Administration Procedures policy dated 9/2024 documented to not give a medication if the label was unclear or illegible. During an observation on [DATE] at 12:10 PM,…

    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 before2021-10-27 · 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 staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the concentration of quaternary ammonium compound chemical sanitizing rinse (QAC) was less than that required by the manufacturer and equipment required cleaning. This is evidenced as follows. The kitchen was inspected on 10/21/2021 at 10:36 AM. The concentration of QAC used to sanitize food contact equipment was found to be 150 parts per million (ppm) when measured at 71 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The manufacturer's label directions stated the concentration is to be between 200 ppm and 400 ppm when the solution is measured between 65 F and 75 F. The refrigerator shelving and door gaskets in the 1st floor nourishment area were soiled with food particles. Record review of the education given to dietary employees revealed that it did not provide specifics on how to check the QAC concentration and to clean refrigerator door gaskets. The Food Service…

    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 · E2019-05-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    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 observation, record review and interview during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity and cared for in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of quality of life for 1 (Unit 2) of 2 resident dining rooms and 4 (Resident #'s 2, 4, 70, and #73) of 5 residents reviewed for dignity. Specifically, the facility did not ensure staff were interacting with residents rather than with each other while assisting residents with meals in 1 of 2 dining rooms; Specifically, for Resident #2, the facility did not ensure the resident's pants were not urine soaked, that a puddle of liquid was not beneath the resident's chair and feet, and that the odor of urine did not permeate a public area of the unit where the resident was observed sitting in a recliner chair; for Resident # 4, the facility did not ensure the resident's right to privacy was protected in the resident dining room; for Resident # 70, the facility did not…

    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 · E2019-05-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure that it developed and implemented a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment, for five Residents (# 33, 42, 70, & 91) of 22. Specifically: for Resident #33, the facility did not ensure that that her care plan for toileting was implemented and addressed the fact that she was continent, that Resident #42 had a care plan to address the different types of pain, that Resident # 70 &91's care plans for pain had interventions individualized for those residents . This is evidenced by: Resident #42: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnosis of polyneuropathy, low back pain with spinal stenosis and Parkinson's Disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated…

    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 · E2019-05-09 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — pattern
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure that pain management was provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan (CCP), and the residents' goals and preferences, for three (Resident #'s 42, 70, and #91) of seven reviewed for pain. Specifically, for Resident #42, 70, and #91, the facility did not ensure that the resident's received adequate pain management. This is evidenced by: The Policy & Procedure titled Pain Management dated 8/2018 documented, it is the policy of the Nursing Home to provide adequate pain management to keep the residents as comfortable as possible. Each Resident each shift and with each pain medication pass will be asked to rate his/her pain according to the MDS pain rating scale. The response will be documented on the electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR). Documentation for routine pain management needs to…

    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 · E2019-05-09 · tag F0813 — pattern
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a policy was developed regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors to ensure safe and sanitary storage, handling, and consumption. Specifically, the facility did not ensure the policy for bringing food(s) in from outside of the facility included a process for assisting residents in accessing and consuming the food if a resident is unable to do so on his/her own and the facility did not provide information for family and visitors on safe food preparation and handling practices. This will be evidenced by: A Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Bringing Food(s) in From Outside the Facility dated 10/2017, documented foods brought in by family memberes or guests will be reported to the Charge Nurse, who would notify Food and Nutrition Services (Diet Technician or responsible staff) for these foods to be received, appropriately stored, and added to the resident's daily menu if appropriate. The food would be stored in the kitchen with 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews during a recertification survey and an abbreviated survey (Case #NY00238270) the facility did not ensure the resident's physician was consulted when there was a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status and when there was a need to alter treatment significantly (that is, a need to discontinue an existing form of treatment due to adverse consequences, or to commence a new form of treatment) for 1 (Resident #42) of 1 resident reviewed for infections. Specifically, for Resident #42, the facility did not ensure the physician was notified that the resident, with a recent history of Clostridium difficile (C-diff) (a bacterium that can cause symptoms ranging from diarrhea to life-threatening inflammation of the colon), was having frequent episodes of loose stools and rectal irritation. This is evidenced by: Resident #42: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnoses of polyneuropathy, Parkinson's Disease,…

    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 · Dcited before2019-05-09 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the residents and/or resident representatives were provided with specific notification when the facility determined that the residents no longer qualified for Medicare Part A services and Medicare benefit days remained for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for Beneficiary Protection Notification. Specifically, for Resident #'s 59, 293, and #294, the facility did not ensure the residents or resident representatives were informed of the beneficiary's potential liability for payment and related standard claim appeal rights using the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN), form CMS-10055. This is evidenced by: The facility was unable to provided documentation that the SNFABN was issued to the identified residents or the resident representatives. During an interview on 5/09/19 at 11:12 AM, Accounts Receivable #10 stated she was unable to find documentation that the SNFABN was issued for the identified residents. She stated she was not familiar with the SNFABN form and it had…

    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 · D2019-05-09 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and 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 record review, and interviews during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure that it addressed the resident's goals of care and treatment preferences. If the resident indicates an interest in returning to the community, the facility must document any referrals to local contact agencies or other appropriate entities made for this purpose, and update a resident's comprehensive care plan and discharge plan, as appropriate, in response to information received from referrals to local contact agencies or other appropriate entities, for one (Resident #22) of two residents reviewed for discharge to the community. Specifically, for Resident #22, the facility did not ensure a referral was made to the appropriate entities when the resident stated she wanted to go home. This is evidenced by: Resident #22: The resident was admitted to the nursing home on 4/20/18, with diagnoses of muscle weakness, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), lymphedema, glaucoma, hypertension (HTN), peripheral vascular disease (PVD).…

    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 · D2019-05-09 · 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 interview conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents in need of respiratory care, received such care consistent with professional standards for 2 residents (Residents #59 and Resident #70) of 2 residents reviewed. Specifically: For Resident #59 and 70, the facility did not ensure a physician's order and indication for use was obtained for the administration of oxygen. This is evidenced by: The Facility Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Physicians Routine Standing Orders, dated 2/2018, documented a Procedure for Limited Use Respiratory Standing Order for; Oxygen (02) 2-3 Liters (L) as needed (PRN) vial nasal cannula (NC) up to 5L/minute (min) PRN via mask. The Facility Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Oxygen by Concentrator, dated 12/2013, documented a general instruction to adjust liter flow as ordered by the physician. Resident #59: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis of congestive heart failure…

    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 · Dcited before2019-05-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    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, manufacturer's directions review, and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Chemicals used in food equipment sanitizing are to be at the correct concentration, food contact surfaces are to be cleaned after use, and non-food contact surfaces must be kept clean. Specifically, the concentration of quaternary ammonium compound chemical sanitizing rinse (QAC) was less than that required by the manufacturer, food contact equipment required cleaning, and non-food contact equipment was not clean. This is evidenced as follows. The kitchen was inspected on 05/06/2019 at 8:45 AM. The concentration of QAC used in the sanitizing rinse sink, and the third sink, was found to be at 0 parts per million (ppm) when measured at 70 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The manufacturer's label directions stated the concentration is to be between 150 ppm and 400 ppm when the solution is measured between 65 F and 75 F. The cutting boards on the storage rack…

    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 · D2019-05-09 · tag F0836 — isolated
    Ensure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview during the recertification survey, carbon monoxide detection was not provided in accordance with adopted regulation. The International Fire Code, 2015 Edition Section 915 Carbon Monoxide Detection, requires carbon monoxide detection in all areas with gas operated equipment. Specifically, carbon monoxide detection was not installed in an area with gas fuel fired equipment. This is evidenced as follows. Observations on 05/07/2019 at 1:55 PM, revealed a fuel burning appliance in the kitchen and laundry rooms without a carbon monoxide detection device. The Plant Operations Director stated in an interview on 05/07/2019 at 2:05 PM, that he was unaware that it was a requirement to provide carbon monoxide detection in these areas. 483.70 (b); 2015 International Fire Code, Section 915

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0943 — isolated
    Give their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure training was provided to their staff on dementia management and resident abuse prevention. Specifically, the facility did not ensure staff were educated on factors related to dementia care and abuse prevention, including conflict resolution, anger management skills, and identifying and addressing staff burnout, frustration, and stress. This is evidenced by: Review of an undated in-service titled Caring for Residents with Dementia provided by Registered Nurse (RN) #7 did not include information related to conflict resolution between staff and residents, visitor and resident, and resident to resident conflicts, anger management, and identifying and addressing staff burnout, frustration, and stress in staff. During an interview on 5/09/19 at 10:23 AM, RN #6 was not able to provide documentation that facility staff had received been educated on resolving conflicts, anger management skills, and identifying and addressing staff burnout, frustration, and stress in staff prior to survey…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation 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

$8,512 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,512 — penalty dated 2024-09-12

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
MCCOSKI, WILLIAMIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 04/04/2006
REPPENHAGEN, MARYANNIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/26/2009
THOMPSON, BARBARAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/15/2012
VANGORDER, DEE DEEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/26/2009
VANSLYKE, NEALIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 09/11/2000
BARTHOLOMEW, CAROLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
CAMPOS, ANNEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2009
KLINE, GEORGEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/1998
MCNAMARA, PETERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2005
SITTERLY, JANEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
SLINGERLAND, SARAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/1992
SMITH, PETERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/1986

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$6.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-57.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 79%Medicare 2%Other / private 18%

About 79% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. 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

$361per resident / day
operating cost
$10,986per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$229per 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 335314. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-12, 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