Elderwood of Uihlein at Lake Placid

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

49.4% 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 104 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 62.5% 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 80 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 156 beds and averages 144.7 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 11 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 2.62 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.43 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 2.40 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.71 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 61% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2024-10-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  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 labelled and stored in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, (a.) an opened medication bottle had an expired date; (b.) opened medication bottles had no open dates (c.) opened insulin pens were labeled with incorrect expiration dates; (d.) a pre-poured medication cup was noted at a resident's bedside. This was evident for 2 out of 3 medication carts reviewed. This is evidenced by: The facility's Policy and Procedure titled, Medications Administration Methods, date last modified: [DATE] documented under PRODCEDURE #5: Medications may not be pre-poured/pre-punched. #6: Medication expiration dates are checked prior to administration. Refer to manufacturer guidelines for medications with shortened expiration dates (i.e. insulin). GENERAL PRECAUTIONS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICATIONS #3: A medication must never be left at bedside or be out…

  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 before2024-10-02 · 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 and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed or served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the main kitchen and one of 3 resident unit kitchenettes. Specifically, appliances and surfaces were not clean. This is evidenced by: During observations on 09/24/2024 at 11:04 AM, in the main kitchen, the following appliances or surfaces were soiled with food particles or oily dust: • Slicer • Cooking line drawers • Bulk food bins • Cupboard doors • 2 exterior windows (windows, windowsills, window screens) • 2 exterior window fan grills • ABC-rated fire extinguisher During observations on 09/24/2024 at 11:56 AM, in the Unit Four Resident Kitchenette, the following was soiled with food particles: Interior of the microwave oven The undated document titled Cooks Cleaning Check List documented that the slicer is to be cleaned and free of debris and utensil drawers are to be clean inside and out. During an interview on 09/24/2024 at 12:01 PM, Director of Dining Services #1…

  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 · E2024-10-02 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — pattern
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. Specifically, the side doors to the two outdoor garbage dumpsters were not closed, the sides of the dumpsters below the doors were soiled with food drips, and the grounds around dumpsters were littered. This is evidenced by: During observations on 9/30/2024 at 12:02 PM, litter was found in the outdoor employee break area, around the dumpsters, and the loading dock area. During an interview on 9/30/2024 12:27 PM, Administrator #1 stated that they would have the areas outside cleaned, and staff would be in-serviced on keeping the break area and dumpster area pick-up. 10 New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations 415.14(h)

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · 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 observation, record review, and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure treatment with respect, dignity, and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for 3 (Resident #s48, 100 and 113) of 32 residents reviewed for dignity. Specifically, (a.) Resident #48 was administered an insulin shot in the resident common area during lunch; (b.) Resident #100 had their shirt on inside and backwards, and (c.) Resident #113 was seen in their room removing their pants with their room door open and in full view of the resident common area. This is evidenced by: A facility policy titled Dignity date modified 8/01/2019, documented that each resident had the right to be treated with dignity and respect. All activities and interaction with residents by any staff, temporary agency staff or volunteers must focus on assisting the resident in maintaining 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a resident was assessed by the interdisciplinary team to determine a resident's ability to safely administer their own medications if clinically appropriate for 1 (Resident #73) of 32 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #73 was observed with topical pain medications in their room and there was no assessment and/or physician order for the resident to self-administer the medications. This is evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure titled, Self- Administration of Medication, revised 4/10/2018, documented residents who desired to self-administer medication were permitted to do so upon review and approval by the interdisciplinary care planning team members and with an order from the attending physician. Legend or over-the-counter medications would be stored in a locked drawer in the resident's room. The use of self-administered medication would be monitored by licensed nursing staff. Resident # 73 was admitted with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary 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 before2024-10-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not provide necessary maintenance services to maintain a clean, sanitary, comfortable, and homelike environment relative to building #1. Specifically, the roof leaked. This is evidenced by: During observations on 09/27/2024 at 10:18 AM, evidence of roof leaks was found in the following areas: • Unit One data room had a large tarp hanging from the ceiling. • Unit One janitor closet had water-stained ceiling tiles. • Activities room had a water-stained ceiling tile. • Core area had 2 areas with drain hoses attached to ceiling tiles draining into catch-buckets. During an interview on 09/30/2024 at 2:02 PM, Administrator #1 stated that the facility is looking to secure a contractor and have the roof leaks repaired before winter. 10 New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations 415.5(h)(4)

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  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 a Significant Change Minimum Data Set assessment was completed for 1 (Resident #128) of 1 resident reviewed. Specifically, a Significant Change Minimum Data Set assessment was not completed for Resident #128, when the resident was diagnosed with a left arm fracture on 4/11/2024, and the resident was no longer able to stand or walk on 4/12/2024. This is evidenced by: Cross-referenced to: F684: Quality of Care Resident #128 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis, muscle weakness, and difficulty walking. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 8/7/2024, documented the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was able to make themselves understood and understand others. The document titled, SNF ADL Summary (Interventions) - V2, and dated 4/08/2024, documented focus: ADL (activities of daily living) function/mobility/restorative care: - Sit to stand: the ability to come to a standing position from sitting in a chair, wheelchair, or on the side 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  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 patient centered care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment in a timely manner for 2 (Resident #'s 128 and 2) of 32 residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure A) Resident #128's care plan was reviewed and revised timely following a fall on 4/6/2024 and fracture diagnosed on [DATE] and B) Resident #2's care plan was reviewed and revised following resident-to-resident altercations on 7/01/2024, 7/08/2024 and 8/03/3024. This is evidenced by: Cross-referenced to: F684: Quality of Care, F637: Comprehensive Assessment After Significant Change The Policy and Procedure titled, Care Planning (IDT), revised 1/22/2019, documented the interdisciplinary team (IDT) would review/revise the care plan after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments per the Resident Assessment Instrument manual. It documented that between care…

  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 · D2024-10-02 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a dependent resident was provided with appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve their language and communication for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #118) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Specifically, nursing staff did not provide Resident #118 with adequate, consistent interpreter services in accordance with professional standards of care. This is evidenced by: Resident #118 was admitted with diagnosis of stenosis of small artery (the walls of the small arteries in the heart aren't working properly); cervicalgia (pain in or around your spine beneath your head) and history of falls. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 9/2024, documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status indicated resident was cognitively intact. The facility document titled, Limited English Proficiency Policy, last modified 4/24/2018, documented Language assistance will be provided through use of competent bilingual staff, staff interpreters contracts of formal…

  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 before2024-10-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's choices for 1 (Resident #128) of 1 resident reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, the facility did not ensure Resident #128 received an assessment by a qualified person when they returned to the facility on 4/11/2024, following diagnosis and treatment of a left upper arm fracture in the Emergency Department. This is evidenced by: Resident #128 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis, muscle weakness, and difficulty walking. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 8/7/2024, documented the resident was cognitively intact. The Comprehensive Care Plan for Safety, revised 8/29/2024, documented the resident was at risk for falls related to impaired gait. The Incident Report for Resident #128 dated 4/6/2024 at 4:32 PM, documented the resident had an unwitnessed fall. The resident stated their left…

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ELDERWOOD — 17 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $4.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 25% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in NY