Achieve Rehab And Nursing Facility
170 Lake Street, Liberty, NY 12754 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 140 certified beds · (845) 292-4200 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 2 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 7.7% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.5% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.7% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.9% | 19.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.3% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.3% | 13.2% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.3% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.2% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.8% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.0% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.7% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 69.1% | 78.8% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.2% | 20.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.8% | 9.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.79 | 1.70 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.27 | 1.36 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
42.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 318 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 48.8% 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 123 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 34% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 42.5%CMS range 37.5–47.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 8.2–13.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 48.8% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 54.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 54.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 99.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 99.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.4% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.2%CMS range 4.6–10.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.19 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 140 beds and averages 132.2 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 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 2.94 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.49 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gdisputed · IDR2026-05-22 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents received adequate supervision to remain free from sexual abuse for one (Resident #80) of one reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 03/12/2026, Maintenance Worker #9 observed the visitor of Resident #66 (roommate of Resident #80) lying on top of Resident #80 with their hands beneath Resident #80's blouse while touching their breasts. Subsequently, Resident #80 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] for evaluation and returned to the facility. On 03/16/2026, there was documented evidence that Resident #80 reported severe difficulty sleeping, with no sleep the previous night. This resulted in actual psychosocial harm that was not Immediate Jeopardy. The findings include:The facility's policy and procedure titled Abuse of Residents policy revised 10/24/2025, documented that all residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation. The facility prohibits any form of abuse…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-22 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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, interview, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents' rights to a dignified existence for two (2) of five (5) residents (Resident #11 and #152) reviewed for dignity and one (1) of 11 residents (Resident #97) observed during dining. Specifically, 1) Resident #11's uncovered nephrostomy drain bag was visible from the hallway 2) Resident #125 was observed dressed in a ripped/torn hospital gown and 3) Residents were served drinks in disposable plastic cups during meals. Additionally, Certified Nurse Aide #8 stood while they assisted Resident #97 with feeding during lunch on 05/17/2026. The findings included: The policy titled Dignity last reviewed 04/2025 documented that all residents are always treated with dignity and respect. When assisting with care, residents are supported in exercising their rights including being provided with a dignified dining experience. Staff are expected to promote dignity, including keeping drainage bags covered. Demeaning practice that compromises…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment on four (4) of four (4) units (1 East, 2 East, 1 West, and 2 West) reviewed for environment. Specifically, 1)1 East, rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had malfunctioning air conditioners, and room [ROOM NUMBER] had a sharp sink edge; 2) 2 East, room [ROOM NUMBER] had a sink that continuously dripped; 3) 2 West, room [ROOM NUMBER] had worn and peeling wallpaper under the sink and the endcaps on the handrails outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] were loose and not affixed properly. Additionally, on 1 West, the wall and wallpaper in the common area near the sink were damaged and the wallpaper was peeling up. The findings included:The Homelike Environment policy last reviewed 02/2026 documented that residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment. Staff provides person-centered care that emphasizes the residents' comfort, independence and personal…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 observation, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for two (2) of three (3) residents (Resident #12 and #16) reviewed for activities of daily living. Specifically, 1) there was no documented evidence that toileting hygiene was consistently provided for Resident #12 on multiple dates in January, February, March and April 2026 and 2) Resident #16 required staff assistance with personal hygiene and was observed on three (3) occasions with dirty and stained fingernails and long facial hair. The findings include: The facility policy Activities of Daily Living Documentation, last reviewed 5/2024, documented it is the responsibility of the certified nurse aide to sign the activities of daily living flow sheet at the end of each shift. 1) Resident #12 had diagnosis that included but were not limited to left leg below knee amputation, acute congestive heart failure and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia. The Annual Minimum…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment was maintained to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for all residents when reviewing the water management plan and three (3) of eight (8) residents (Resident #95, Resident#124, and Resident #157) reviewed for medication administration. Specifically, 1) a water management plan was missing and not provided at the time of the survey; 2) on 05/19/2026, after using the community glucometer on Resident #65, Licensed Practical Nurse #14 was stopped and asked to sanitize the glucometer before using it on Resident #124; 3) on 05/21/2026, after administering medications to Resident #40, Licensed Practical Nurse #22 did not sanitize their hands prior to medication administration for Resident #95. Additionally, when administering dorzolamide eye drops to Resident #157, Licensed Practical Nurse #7 used the same tissue to wipe both eyes after administration of the medication. The findings included:1) Review on 5/20/26…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 (one) of 28 residents (Resident #153) reviewed for quality of care. Specifically, for Resident #153 who received Eliquis (blood thinner) and sustained a fall on 08/20/2024, there was no documented evidence that a physician order was put in place timely to address every one-hour neuro checks and right shoulder/forearm radiographic imaging to rule out fracture as per the 08/20/2024 at 7:01 AM incident report interventions. Subsequently, there was no documented evidence that every one-hour neuro checks were conducted prior to 1:00 PM on 08/20/2024. Additionally, there was no documented evidence that right shoulder/forearm radiographic imaging was conducted prior to Resident #153's transfer to the hospital on [DATE]. The findings included:The policy titled Fall Assessment, Prevention and Management, last reviewed 10-2025, documented the resident…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 interview, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices consistent with the resident's needs to prevent accidents for two (2) of six (6) residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #92 and Resident #61). Specifically, 1) floor mats were observed by the bed and a bedside commode was observed blocking the bathroom door in the room of Resident #92 who had a history of fall on 05/06/2026. Additionally, there was no documented evidence that a physical therapy evaluation was conducted timely and 2) for Resident #61, there was no documented evidence that the resident was assessed to determine safe usage of an electric coffee pot The findings include: The policy titled Fall Assessment, Prevention and Management, last reviewed 10-2025, documented provide a safe environment to prevent falls and subsequent injuries with fall prevention measures that can be put in place per physician order, and to avoid fall mats with ambulatory…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-22 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent during medication administration observations on 05/19/2026, 05/20/2026, and 05/21/2026. 32 opportunities for errors were observed, two (2) errors were made, yielding a 6.25% medication administration error rate for two (2) of eight (8) residents observed (Resident #19 and Resident#40). Specifically, 1) Resident #19 was administered two and one half (2.5) milligrams of amlodipine besylate instead of one (1) (5) five milligram tablet as ordered and 2) Resident #40 was going to be administered two (2) 500 milligram tablets of magnesium until the contents of the cup were counted by this surveyor prior to administration. Additionally, they were administered one 500 milligram tablet of magnesium instead of two 250 milligram tablets. The findings included:The Medication Administration Policy dated 04/29/2026 documented that the nurse administering medication must follow the rights 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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (456441), the facility did not maintain medical records on each resident that are complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for documentation. Specifically, on 13 different dates in December 2024 Resident #2 was due to receive medications at 9:00am and the medication administration audit report indicates that the 9:00am medications were not administered at the scheduled time.The facility medication and administration policy last revised 10/24 documented that the facility staff will provide safe and accurate medication administration to the residents. Medications are administered by licensed nurses, with and in accordance with physician order. Documentation of medication administration is completed at the time of dosage administration. Under the section titled general information: The right medication, is given to the right resident, at the right time, by the right route, in the right dose. Each shift 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-30 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct 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 during an Abbreviated Survey (456441), it was determined that the facility assessment failed to adequately identify and indicate how they maintain the resources necessary to care for its residents. Specifically, the facility assessment failed to adequately identify how the facility addresses contingency planning regarding necessary resources and failed to identify a facility plan to maximize recruitment and retention of direct care staff.The facility's assessment dated [DATE], reviewed by Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Committee on 09/04/2025 is the most recent assessment conducted by the facility, it is the facility assessment that was reviewed as part of the Abbreviated Survey noted above, and which for these findings will be known as the facility assessment.The facility assessment indicates that the facility is a 140 bed Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) with four (4) nursing units: one rehabilitation unit, one stepdown medically complex unit, and two long term care units…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 interview during an abbreviated survey (NY00333655), the facility did not ensure resident received treatment and care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for skin conditions. Specifically, Resident #1 left leg wound care notes from 3/10/2023 to 4/14/2023 revealed the resident's right heel plantar aspect wound increased in size, and the left heel plantar aspect wound was 95% necrotic (dead tissue). Review of the Treatment Administration Record documented omissions from 3/2/2023 to 4/22/2023. Consequently, the resident was transferred to the hospital on 4/26/2023 for evaluation worsened of left heel, macerated and bleeding and right heel maceration. Findings included: Review of the facility policy and procedure titled Wound Care Team, Assessment and Documentation revised 3/2019, documented all new wounds are to be reported as they are identified to the wound care nurse. In addition, the wound care nurse will round weekly with a physician or nurse practitioner. Review of the facility policy 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.
Show the remaining 23 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY 00322762) surveys conducted 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not ensure the development and implementation of a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, and nursing, needs for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #84) reviewed for hospitalizations, 2 of 2 residents (Residents #122 and #72) reviewed for urinary tract infections, 2 of 3 resident (Residents #179 and #98) reviewed for respiratory care, and 1 of 6 residents (Residents #281) reviewed for accidents. Specifically, 1.) Resident #84 did not have a care plan in place to address cardiac issues, 2.) Resident #122 did not have a plan of care in place to address urinary tract infection or cystitis (inflammation/infection of the bladder), and 3.) Resident #179 did not have a care plan in place to address respiratory care and the use of oxygen. The findings are: The facility policy, Care Plan revised 7/2020, documented that each resident will…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 interview conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated Surveys (NY 00326169, NY 00341314, and NY 00322762) from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remained as free of accidents hazards as possible for 3 (Residents #280, #281 and #92) of 6 residents reviewed for accidents. Specifically, 1. Resident #280 was assessed at high risk for falls, care plan interventions were not in place and Resident #280 had an unwitnessed fall and required hospitalization for two lacerations to the face and a subdural hematoma (brain bleed). The facility did not thoroughly investigate to determine if interventions were adequate, and if the plan of care was followed. 2. Resident #281 was eating dinner, became unresponsive, required cardiopulmonary resuscitation and was sent to the Emergency Department. The facility did not investigate the incident to determine if the resident received the correct food consistency, had adequate supervision, or…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-23 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated (351312) surveys from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not ensure that Certified Nurse Aide performance appraisals were completed at least once every 12 months. Specifically, performance appraisals were not documented every 12 months for 4 of 5 Certified Nurse Aides (Certified Nurse Aides #1, #2, #3, #4) records reviewed. The findings are: There was no documented evidence that an annual performance review was completed for Certified Nurse Aide #1 who was hired 8/22/2018, Certified Nurse Aide #2 who was hired 7/20/2023, Certified Nurse Aide #3 who was hired 9/16/2020 and Certified Nurse Aide #4 who was hired 6/22/2023. On 10/17/24 at 4:08 PM during an interview with the Director of Human Resources, the surveyor requested to view the annual performance reviews for Certified Nurse Aides #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5. The Director of Human Resources stated they could not locate the annual performance reviews for Certified Nurse Aides #1, #2, #3, and #4. They stated the process for the annual performance…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview conducted during the recertification survey from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not ensure that food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food safety practice. Specifically, there was food stored in the walk-in refrigerator and dry storage room that was undated and past the expiration date. Finding include: The revised-on October 2019 facility policy titled Food Storage: Cold documented the Dining Services Director/Cook ensures that all food items are stored properly in covered containers, labeled, and dated and arranged in a manner to prevent cross contamination. The revised-on October 2019 facility policy titled Food Storage - Dry Goods documented the Dining Services Director or designee ensures that the storage will be neat, arranged for easy identification, and date marked as appropriate. During an initial tour of the kitchen on 10/16/24 at 9:39 AM, conducted with the Regional Director of Operations, the following were observed in the walk-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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00351312) surveys from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infection. Specifically, 1) the facility did not properly implement transmission-based precautions for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for infection control precautions (Residents #84, #117, #120) and 2) the facility did not ensure that an infection surveillance plan was implemented for identifying, tracking, and monitoring infections, communicable diseases, and outbreaks for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for infection control (Residents #122, #72, #120). The findings are: The facility policy, Infection Prevention and Control, Surveillance Program pp 125-127 documented the purpose of the Surveillance Program is to conduct surveillance of resident and employee infections to guide prevention activities and the Infection Preventionist conducts surveillance of infections among residents and employees…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-23 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00351312) surveys from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24 the facility did not maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of pests. Specifically, Resident #70's room had glue traps for insects and rodents, with gnats and cockroaches observed inside the trap. Findings include: The facility policy and procedure titled Pest Control with a revised date of May 2008 documented the facility maintained an on-going pest control program to ensure that the building was kept free of insects and rodents. During observation on 10/16/24 at 10:38 AM, Resident #70's room had insect and rodent traps on the cabinet next to the resident's bed, and on the sink counter, with many gnats and a cockroach stuck inside the trap. During an interview on 10/16/24 at 12:05 PM, Resident #70 stated that in their room they had flies and roaches on a regular basis and that was why there were traps. The resident stated they had lived at the facility for over 3 years and the pest problem 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during recertification and abbreviated (NY 00351312) surveys from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not ensure action as a fiduciary (trustee) of the resident's funds and hold, safeguard, manage, and account for the residents' personal funds deposited with the facility for 1 (Resident #14) of 1 resident reviewed for personal funds. Specifically, the facility did not ensure residents had access to their personal funds on weekends. The findings are: Review of an undated facility policy and procedure titled Resident Personal Needs Account Policy documented that residents have the right to manage their own personal funds. The facility assists with holding, safeguarding, managing, and accounting for their personal funds. The personal needs account will be accessible daily including weekends and holidays as residents see fit. Resident banking is typically conducted through the front desk from 7 am to 9:30pm, 7 days a week. Review of the facility policy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, record review, and interview conducted during the recertification survey from 10/16/2024 to 10/23/2024 the facility did not ensure that all drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and professional standard of practice for 1 (Resident #179) of 3 residents reviewed for Medication Administration. Specifically, Resident #179 was found with physician ordered Ipratropium-Albuterol inhaler, Sodium Chloride nasal solution and Flonase allergy relief nasal spray in their room on their bedside table. The findings include: The facility policy titled Storage of Medications dated 11/2020 documented the facility is responsible for storing drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. Resident #179 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Asthma, Obstructive Sleep Apnea, and Anxiety. The 9/19/2024 Physician Order documented Fluticasone Propionate nasal suspension 50 microgram/actuation, 2 spray two times a day in both nostril. Sodium Chloride nasal solution 0.65% four times a day in both nostrils 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview during the Recertification Survey from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not ensure that food on trays was held at palatable temperatures for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #70) reviewed for Food. Specifically, for Resident #70 food was not served at palatable temperatures. The findings are: Resident #70 was admitted with diagnoses including but not limited to non-Alzheimer's dementia, malnutrition, ataxia. The current Physician Order documented regular texture, regular thin consistency, please provide moist ground meats, except when on a sandwich (turkey sandwich, hamburger). The 8/30/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (a resident assessment tool) documented Resident #70 had intact cognition, and needed set-up and clean-up assistance with eating. During an interview on 10/16/24 at 12:05 PM, Resident #70 stated they did not like the food, the food was cold. The surveyor observed stored closed food packages in the resident's room. The resident's son was present and stated they just went shopping to buy the resident food. On 10/21/24 at 1:01…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and interview conducted during the recertification and abbreviated surveys (NY 00326169) from 10/16/24 to 10/23/24, the facility did not ensure that the Minimum Data Set assessments accurately reflected the residents' status at the time of the assessments for 1 (Resident #280) of 35 sampled residents. Specifically, the Minimum Data Set assessment inaccurately documented that Resident #280 who had a care plan for bed and chair alarms, was assessed to have no alarms. The findings are: Resident #280 was admitted with diagnoses including but not limited to a displaced intertrochanteric fracture of the right femur, history of falling, and muscle weakness. The 8/2/23 At Risk For Falls Due To An Adjustment To A New Environment Care Plan documented interventions including placing alarms to both the bed and the chair. The 8/5/23 admission Minimum Data Set documented Resident #280 had intact cognition and had no bed or chair alarms. During an interview on 10/22/24 at 3:28 PM, the Minimum Data Set Coordinator stated that when they are doing the Minimum Data Set, they…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · tag F0943 — isolatedGive 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 interview during a recertification survey and abbreviated survey (NY 00322762), the facility did not ensure staff were provided with education on activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, dementia management and misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 6 staff members reviewed (Certified Nurse Aide #13) for education. Specifically, the facility was unable to provide documented evidence Certified Nurse Aide #13 received any education. Findings include: The 3/08 Policy titled Abuse Prevention Reporting and Investigating documented all employees receive education related to abuse, neglect and misappropriation of resident property, involuntary seclusion, and abandonment. The 9/1/23 Investigation Summary completed by former Director of Nursing #12 documented Resident #92 sustained a wrist fracture. The evidence including statements and an x-ray determined that there was reasonable cause that neglect had occurred and it was a direct care plan violation by Certified Nurse Aide #13. Certified Nurse Aide #13 was immediately removed from working…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 record review and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00316474), the facility did not ensure adequate supervision was provided and that the residents environment remained as free of accidents hazards as possible for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. Specifically, Resident #1 who had a diagnosis of dementia history of wandering and elopement exited the facility through the front door on 05/11/2023 independently undetected by staff. Resident #1 was care planned to have wander guard, but the resident had no wander guard on. Resident #1 obtained access as the receptionist was letting a visitor out the front door. Resident #1 wandered out the front door of the facility and walked along side fence and was observed by Recreation Aide (RA#1) who escorted them back into the building unharmed. The findings are: The Facility Policy on Wandering/Elopement Residents dated 2/1/2017 was reviewed. The policy documented that the residents care plan will be modified to indicate…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-27 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 interviews and record review during a Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (#272489 and #290316) conducted from 9/19/22 to 9/27/22, the facility did not ensure that residents received a safe and/or appropriate discharge. This was evident for 2 out of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #228 and #226) for discharge. Specifically, 1. the facility did not ensure Resident #228 had a safe discharge plan prior to being discharged to the community and 2. the facility did not complete the Patient Review Instrument (PRI) for Resident #226 in a timely manner for transfer to another facility. The findings are: The Facility Policy and Procedure titled, Discharge Plan and Summary, dated 11/2021 documented when notified of resident's request for discharge, Social Service Staff will notify CCP Coordinator to set up a discharge meeting to include the Attending Physician, appropriate staff, the resident and/or family, pertinent information regarding the reasons for the request, prospective…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-27 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 conducted during a Recertification Survey conducted between 9/19/22-9/27/22, the facility did not ensure that the Comprehensive Care Plan was revised for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #98 and Resident #121) Specifically, 1. The Contracture Care Plan for Resident #98 was not revised to reflect the physician prescribed use of bilateral hand rolls and bilateral knee splints and 2. The Advanced Directive Care Plan for Resident #121 was not revised to reflect the change from Full Code to Do not Resuscitate, Do Not Intubate and Comfort Measures Only. The findings are: The Policy and Procedure titled Care Plan Policy dated 8/2/21 documented Comprehensive Care Plans are reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments. 1. Resident #98 had diagnosis including but not limited to Non-Pressure Chronic Ulcer of Left Ankle with Spastic Quadriplegic Cerebral Palsy and Contracture of Muscle-Multiple…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey conducted 9/19/22- 9/27/22, the facility did not ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan for two of two residents (Resident #55 and #98) reviewed for Quality of Care. Specifically, 1. Resident #55 did not receive twice a week Unna boot changes to treat venous stasis of the lower extremity as ordered by the physician. Additionally, 2. (Resident #98) the use of hand rolls and knee splints were not consistently utilized as per physician orders. The findings are: Review of the Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Treatment of Venous Stasis Ulcers revised 8/2021 documented to treat the healing of venous stasis ulcers through the application of even pressure on affected extremities, without causing trauma or further skin breakdown. The policy further documented the application of the Unna boot must be done according 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-27 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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 interviews, observations, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey from 9/19/22 to 9/27/22, the facility did not ensure that care and treatment were provided to ensure prevention of pressure ulcers for 1 of 4 residents (Resident#98) reviewed for Pressure Ulcers. Specifically, for Resident #98, heel lift boots wre not applied as per physicians orders. The Findings Are: Resident #98 had diagnosis including but not limited to Non-Pressure Chronic Ulcer of Left Ankle with Spastic Quadriplegic Cerebral Palsy and Contracture of Muscle-Multiple Sites. Review of the Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented severely impaired cognition, no behaviors noted total assistance of one-two staff for bed mobility, transfer, eating and toileting, and was at risk for development of pressure ulcers but had no pressure ulcers. Review of the Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] documenetd severe cognitive impairment, no behaviors noted, total assistance of one-two staff for bed mobility, transfers,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-27 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review during the Standard survey completed 9/27/22, the facility did not ensure they maintained an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of pests. Specifically, there were multiple observations of gnats flying around the hallway and resident rooms on unit 2 East. The findings are: Review of the Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Pest Control dated 11/2021 documented all possible measures are taken, within reason, to maintain as pest-free a facility as possible. Additional treatments by the pest control company are obtained as needed. The P&P further documented housekeeping or maintenance will conduct weekly inspections for evidence of pests, document problems found during inspection and the remedial actions taken. In addition, staff should report insect or pest sightings to the environmental services supervisor immediately. Review of the Pest Tech Book on 9/26/22 at 1:44 PM for unit 2 East documented no evidence of gnats being reported by…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-03-28 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 record review and interview the facility did not ensure that resident representatives were notified in writing of transfers from the facility to the hospital. This was evident for 5 of 5 residents reviewed for hospitalization. (Residents # 73, 19, 105, 120 and 23). The findings are: Resident #73 was transferred to the hospital on 3/11/19 with a diagnosis of hyperkalemia (elevated potassium level). The resident returned to the facility on 3/13/19. Resident #19 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of pneumonia. The resident returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #105 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of pneumonia. The resident returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #23 was transferred to the hospital on 2/15/19 with a diagnosis of flu and cellulitis of the right thigh. The resident returned to the facility on 2/20/19. Resident #120 was transferred to the hospital on 3/17/19 related to ongoing lethargy, poor appetite and elevated body temperature.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-03-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 observation, record review, and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that 1) a care plan with measurable objectives, time frames, and appropriate interventions was initiated for 1 resident reviewed for positioning and mobility (Resident #72) and 2) interventions for the care of an indwelling catheter were included in the plan of care for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #72) reviewed for hospitalization. The findings are: 1. Resident #72 was admitted with diagnoses including neurogenic bladder and paraplegia. Review of the minimum data set (MDS- a resident assessment tool) dated 8/3/18 the resident was cognitively intact, received extensive assist for bed mobility and had impairment of both lower extremities. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] indicated the resident was cognitively intact, received extensive assist for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and had functional limitation of both lower extremities. Review of the comprehensive care plan dated 9/11/18…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-03-28 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 interview the facility did not ensure that a care plan that addressed care needs related to infections had been reviewed and revised to include a recent hospitalization for pneumonia. This was evident for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #19). The findings are: Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Current diagnoses as identified on the annual minimum data set (MDS- a resident assessment tool) dated 6/28/18 include; obstructive neuropathy, Alzheimer's disease and anxiety. Review of the admission/discharge/transfer information in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record) indicated the resident was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned on 12/31/18. Review of the nursing progress notes indicated the following: 12/27/18: shallow breathing and intermittent periods of apnea, lethargic, transferred to emergency department for evaluation. 12/27/18: called hospital. Resident diagnosed with bilateral pneumonia. 12/31/19: readmitted to the facility.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-03-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review conducted during the most recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that 1 resident (Resident #120) reviewed for hospitalization was provided the necessary care to promptly address ongoing poor fluid intake to prevent dehydration. Specifically, the resident's fluid intake and output were significantly low for approximately five weeks (2/9/19 to 3/14/19) with no timely measures in place to prevent dehydration and/or electrolyte imbalance. The findings are: Resident #120, an 84 year female, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of Cystitis (infection of the bladder), Urinary Tract Infection and Dementia. The resident's advanced directives reflected in a Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatments (MOLST) form document dated 2/6/19 indicated that a trial of intravenous fluid was allowed and the decision on tube feeding was deferred. A dietary assessment dated [DATE] revealed that the resident's estimated daily fluid requirement was 1770 cc.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-03-28 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey the facility did not ensure that treatments and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion and/or contractures was provided for 1 resident (Resident #72) reviewed for position/mobility. Specifically, passive range of motion was not being performed for a resident with impaired mobility. The findings are: Resident #72 was admitted with diagnoses including; hypertension and paraplegia. Review of the 8/3/18 Minimum data set (MDS; a resident assessment tool) indicated he was cognitively intact, received extensive assist for bed mobility and had impairment of both lower extremities. Review of the 2/3/19 MDS indicated the resident was cognitively intact, received extensive assist for bed mobility, transfers, toileting needs and had functional limitation of both lower extremities. Review of the comprehensive care plan dated 9/11/18 revealed an intervention to provide daily PROM (passive range of motion) to all extremities during cares. An observation on 3/22/19 at 2:07 PM revealed…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-03-28 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview the facility did not ensure that the consultant pharmacist's recommendations were acted upon by the resident's primary care physician. This was evident for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #100). The findings are: Resident #100 was admitted with diagnoses including; Atrial Fibrillation, Hypertension and Thyroid Disorder. Review of the March 2019 physician's orders included the following medications; Tylenol 650 mg every 12 hours for chronic pain Tylenol 650 mg every 6 hours for chronic pain due to trauma Hydroxyzine 25mg three times daily for Anxiety Lasix 20mg twice daily for Hypertension Losartan 25mg daily for Hypertension Mirtazapine 7.5 mg at bed time for Depression Paroxetine 40 mg daily for Depression Synthroid 50mg daily -Malignant Neoplasm of Thyroid Gland Warfarin 3 mg in the evening for Atrial Fibrillation. The Consultant Pharmacist Monthly Medication Regimen Review (MRR) indicated the following: 5/30/18 - order labs: Lipid panel (tests for cholesterol level and other blood lipids) and HGBA1C (to test for…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OSTREICHER, SANDRA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 45% | since 08/01/2007 |
| SCHEINER, ELIEZER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 45% | since 08/01/2007 |
| ZELMAN, ELIEZER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 08/01/2007 |
| WOOD, RYAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| YOUNESI, PEYMAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% 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
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.
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 335449. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-23, 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.