Sullivan County Adult Care Center
256 Sunset Lake Road, Liberty, NY 12754 · Government - County · 146 certified beds · (845) 292-8640 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0610) — most recent May 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $9,620 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-27)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (64%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 9.4% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.4% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 22.9% | 19.5% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 4.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.9% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 29.3% | 13.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.4% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.3% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.1% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.1% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 34.1% | 78.8% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.8% | 20.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.3% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.33 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.74 | 1.36 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
36.5% 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 156 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 67.0% 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 88 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 54% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 | 36.5%CMS range 30.0–43.7 | 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 | 14.0%CMS range 10.5–18.7 | 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 | 67.0% | 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 | 55.7% | 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 | 67.0% | 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 | 86.4% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 9.3% | 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 | 6.9%CMS range 4.2–10.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 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 146 beds and averages 113.6 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 32 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.11 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.67 is at or above 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.25 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of abuse and implement appropriate corrective actions to protect a resident from further abuse. This was evident for one resident (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 05/11/2026, Certified Nurse Aide #1 reported to Licensed Practical Nurse #1 and Registered Nurse Supervisor #1 that they observed Certified Nurse Aide #2 forcibly grab Resident #1 and push the resident into a wheelchair, then use the dining room table as a barrier preventing Resident #1 from getting out of the wheelchair. Certified Nurse Aide #1 also reported that they heard Certified Nurse Aide #2 repeatedly use profanities toward Resident #1. After receiving the report of the allegations, Registered Nurse Supervisor #1 did not initiate an immediate investigation, including assessing Resident #1 for physical injuries or psychosocial harm and they did not remove Certified Nurse Aide #2 from direct access to Resident #1 or other residents. The facility's failure to investigate…
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.
- Actual harm · Hcited before2026-02-02 · 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 record review and staff interviews conducted during a survey, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment was free of accident hazards and/or that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for three (3) of six (6) residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #1, #2, & 3). Specifically, 1) On 11/01/2024, Certified Nurse Assistant #2 did not follow the care plan and attempted to transfer Resident #1 by themself as a stand pivot and the resident fell, hit their head, and subsequently required transfer to the hospital. 2) On 12/26/2025, Resident #2 was provided with morning care, was unable to walk and had a significant bruise on their right hip. Resident #2 was sent out to the hospital for x-rays, and it was determined that they had a fractured right hip. There was no indication of how this occurred, no facility investigation, and no report to the New York State Department of Health. 3) On 12/15/2025, Resident #3 was noted to have a bruise on their left leg, was…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-27 · 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 conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated Surveys (NY00333577 and NY00320085) from 9/22/2024 to 9/27/2024, the facility did not ensure that the residents environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 2 (Residents #219 and #95) of 7 residents reviewed for accidents. Specifically, 1. Resident #219 who- was being transferred via Mechanical lift by two certified nurse aides, fell from the mechanical lift due to the battery dying and Certified Nurse Aides #20 and #23 unhooking the straps instead of using the emergency lower button, subsequently causing a hematoma (large pool of blood under the skin resulting from injury) to the back of Resident #219's head which resulted in them having to be transferred to the emergency room for further evaluation. 2. Resident #95 was provided with a snack upon request, which was not according to the resident's prescribed diet order. As a result, the Resident #95 sustained a choking occurrence, became…
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 before2026-05-29 · 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
Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during a Survey, the facility did not ensure a resident's right to be free from abuse for one (1) Resident #1 of four (4) residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 05/11/2026, Certified Nurse Aide #1 reported observing Certified Nurse Aide #2 forcibly grab Resident #1, and push the resident against a wheelchair, using the dinning room table as a barrier preventing Resident #1 from getting out of the wheelchair and repeatedly used profanities towards Resident #1. Certified Nurse Aide #1 reported the allegation of verbal and physical abuse involving Resident #1 and Certified Nurse Aide #2 to Registered Nurse Supervisor #1 and Licensed Practical Nurse #1. Certified Nurse Aide #2 was not removed from the unit and continued to be assigned to care for Resident #1 from the date of the allegation until 05/21/2026 during the onsite visit when Certified Nurse Aide #2 was reassigned.The Findings include: The facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Residents' Property, revised…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Abbreviated Survey, the facility failed to ensure that alleged violations involving abuse were reported to the Department of Health immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation if the events that caused the allegation result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that caused the allegation do not result in serious bodily injury, and report the results of the investigation to the Department of Health within 5 working days. This was evident for one (1) Resident #1 of four (4) residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 05/11/2026, Certified Nurse Aide #1 reported an alleged physical/verbal abuse of Resident #1 by Certified Nurse Aide #2 to Licensed Practical Nurse #1 and Registered Nurse Supervisor #1. Certified Nurse Aide #1 reported observing Certified Nurse Aide #2 forcibly grab Resident #1, force Resident #1 into a wheelchair, place a dining room table in front of Resident #1 to prevent movement, and repeatedly use profanities toward Resident #1. 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 · D2026-05-29 · 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 the Abbreviated Survey, the facility failed to ensure Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan was reviewed and revised following assessment and as necessary to reflect changes in the resident's needs for one (1) (Resident #1) of four (4) residents reviewed for care planning. Specifically, following allegations of verbal and physical abuse of Resident #1 by Certified Nurse Aide #2, the resident's psychosocial well-being, risk to be victimized/aggressor, and behavior care plans were not reviewed or revised. Review of the psychosocial well-being and risk to be victimized/aggressor care plans revealed they were last revised on 04/09/2026. Review of the behavior care plan revealed it was last revised on 04/24/2026.The Findings Include: The facility's Comprehensive Care Planning Policy, revised 02/2026 and reviewed on 05/26/2026, documented, Comprehensive care plans shall be reviewed and updated with significant change in condition and when desired outcomes are not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Abbreviated Survey, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff possessed the competencies and skill sets necessary to provide nursing and related services to residents for one (1) (Certified Nurse Aide #1) of nine (9) facility staff records reviewed for mandatory training requirements. Specifically, Certified Nurse Aide #1 was assigned resident care duties and worked on 05/11/2026; however, the facility was unable to provide documentation verifying completion of required orientation and mandatory training, which included, but was not limited to, Abuse/Neglect/Exploitation Prohibition, Behavioral Care Services/Cognitive Impairment/Dementia Training, and Trauma Informed Care.The Findings Include: The facility's Education and Training of Nursing Personnel Policy documented, The facility uses a competency-based approach to nurse and nurse aide staffing and will conduct regular competency reviews to ensure that nursing personnel are adequately trained. The policy further documented, New employees of the facility will attend…
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 before2026-02-02 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, including injuries of unknown origin were reported immediately, but not later than 2 (two) hours after the allegation was made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, to the New York State Department of Health. This was evident for 2 (two) of 6 (six) residents reviewed for injury of unknown origin. (Resident #2 and Resident #3). Specifically, 1) On 12/26/2025, Resident #2 was provided with morning care, was unable to walk and had a significant bruise on their right hip. Resident #2 was sent out to the hospital for x-rays, and it was determined that they had a fractured right hip. There was no indication of how this occurred, no facility investigation, and no report to the New York State Department of Health. 2) On 12/15/2025, Resident #3 was noted to have a bruise on their left leg, was transferred…
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 before2026-02-02 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 the facility did not ensure accidents of unknown origin were thoroughly investigated for 2 (two) of 6 (six) residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #2 and Resident #3). Specifically, 1) On 12/26/2025, Resident #2 was provided with morning care, was unable to walk and had a significant bruise on their right hip. Resident #2 was sent out to the hospital for x-rays, and it was determined that they had a fractured right hip. There was no indication of how this occurred, no facility investigation, and no report to the New York State Department of Health. 2) On 12/15/2025, Resident #3 was noted to have a bruise on their left leg, was transferred to the emergency department on 12/19/2025 and diagnosed with a fracture of unknown origin to their left tibia and fibula. Each incident resulted in actual harm to Resident #2 and Resident #3 that is not immediate jeopardy.The undated policy titled Accidents and Incidents - Investigating 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 · Dcited before2025-12-02 · 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 the abbreviated survey (544161), the facility did not ensure that adequate supervision and safety monitoring interventions were consistently implemented and documented to prevent accidents and recurrence of self-injurious behaviors for one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for accidents. Specifically, Resident #1 who was severely cognitively impaired and care planned as ha having behavior of chewing on nonfood items, was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] for evaluation after biting their left middle finger. Resident #1 had a portion of their left middle finger amputated and was diagnosed with self-inflicted traumatic amputation of the left finger. Resident #1 returned to the facility on [DATE] with an initial physician's order for hourly safety checks which was changed to 15 minute safety checks on 3/13/2024. Resident #1 returned to the hospital on 3/22/2024 for further amputation of the left middle finger. The facility was unable to provide…
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 · D2025-11-20 · tag F0841 — isolatedDesignate a physician to serve as medical director responsible for implementation of resident care policies and coordination of medical care in the facility.
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 reviews and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (2620167), the facility did not ensure the Medical Director fulfilled their responsibility for the implementation of resident care when the resident died. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for death. Specifically, Resident # 1 died on [DATE] and the Medical Director signed the death certificate electronically on [DATE]. In accordance with State Public Health Law 4041, this was required within 72 hours of death.Resident #1's diagnoses include, but not limited to, Dementia, repeated falls, chronic kidney disease stage 3, and basal cell carcinoma of skin of nose. A significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented Resident #1 had a brief interview for mental status score of 09; indicating the resident has moderate cognitive impairment with no behaviors present. Resident had no impairments to upper and lower extremities and used a wheelchair for locomotion. A Nursing progress note dated [DATE] at 1:31am documented…
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 before2025-04-15 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to initiate and complete a thorough investigation of an alleged violation of abuse to prevent further potential abuse. Specifically , On 3/2125 at 12:00pm Resident #1 was at the nurse's station and 3 staff witnessed (Certified Nurse Aide #1 and #2 and Domestic Aide #1)and reported to different Registered Nurses (Registered Nurse #1 and #2) and to the Director of Nursing that they witnessed an incident where Resident #1 was picked up from behind in a bear hug and dropped on the floor and then carried to their room by Domestic Aide #2. There was no evidence that the nursing staff reported the allegation of abuse to the facility Administrator or that they conducted an investigation into the allegations of abuse. Resident #1 had diagnoses including Unspecified Dementia, Mood Disturbance, and Non-Alzheimer Dementia. The 12/20/24 Minimum Data Set for Resident #1 documented had moderately impaired cognition. Review of the facility Abuse Policy last revision date 10/24 under the section Procedure documented that any report 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 · D2025-04-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 reviews, and interviews conducted during a Complaint survey (NY00376081) the facility did not ensure that services provided met professional standards of quality. This was evident for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for Medication Administration. Specifically, Resident #1 was administered an intramuscular injection of Lorazepam solution 1 MG that had been prescribed for another resident. The findings are: The facility policy titled Medication Administration created 1/87 and with a revision date of 4/24, documented that it is not acceptable to share medications between residents. The policy also documented that the right medication, is given to the right resident, at the right time, by the right route in the right dose. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Unspecified Dementia, Mood Disturbance, and Non-Alzheimer's Dementia. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented that Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition. The Medication…
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 28 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-15 · tag F0741 — failed to have staff trained for behavioral health — isolatedEnsure that the facility has sufficient staff members who possess the competencies and skills to meet the behavioral health needs of residents.
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 and extended survey (NY00376081), the facility did not ensure that all nursing staff were competent and trained in providing care to residents with various psychiatric/mood disorders as listed in the current facility assessment. Specifically, 1 (Resident #1) of 4 residents with psychiatric diagnoses do not have staff in the facility that are trained to provide appropriate behavioral health care. The facility was unable to provide documented evidence that they provided nursing staff education on behavioral health training other than for dementia. Resident #1 Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] with diagnoses unspecified dementia, moderate with mood disturbance. non traumatic brain dysfunction, non-Alzheimer's dementia. No behaviors are noted. Resident #1 was evaluated and was found to be moderately cognitively impaired with a brief interview of mental status of 11. On PHQ2-9 a depression screening tool Resident #1 scored a 13, indicating elevated…
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 · Fcited before2024-09-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 observations and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 9/22/24 to 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food safety practice, and essential equipment was not in safe operating condition. Specifically, 1. Food was stored in the walk-in freezers and refrigerators that was unlabeled, undated and without expiration dates. 2. Expired foods were stored in refrigerators and the dry storage room. 3. Freezers #6 and #7's insulation door seals were not attaching properly causing the formation of ice on the ceiling and walls inside the freezers. 4. Damaged tile flooring next to the dishwashing machine formed an uneven and wobbly surface. Finding include: The undated facility policy Food Receiving and Storage documented all foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled, and dated. During an initial tour of the kitchen on 09/22/24 at 4:40 PM conducted with Head [NAME] the following were observed in the walk-in freezer #7: 1. A bag of frozen chicken breast, without original box,…
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 before2024-09-27 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 the Recertification and Abbreviated surveys (NY 00351488 and NY 00335211) from 9/22/24 to 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that there was sufficient nursing staff to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Specifically, upon review of the staffing schedule for multiple days and on all three shifts of staffing for each floor, the facility did not provide adequate staffing to meet the needs of the residents. The findings are: The Facility assessment dated [DATE] documented Licensed Practical Nurses providing direct care and Nurses Aides were staffed based on the acuity of units or demands of unit as determined by the Clinical Administration on a fluid basis as the needs of the residents and census are ever changing. 1) The facility census on 9/22/2024 was 115 residents. On 9/27/2024, the Unit 1 census was 17 and Unit 2 census was 39. A review of actual Staffing Sheets from 9/1/2024 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 · E2024-09-27 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure 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 conducted during the Recertification survey from 9/22/24 to 9/27/24, the facility did not provide food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature. Specifically, food was served out of temperature (chicken, pasta, vegetables, and milk). Findings include: The facility policy Food and Nutrition Services revised on 8/2023 and edited on 12/4/2023 documented, food and nutrition services staff will inspect food trays to ensure that the correct meal is provided to each resident, the food appears palatable and attractive, and it is served at a safe and appetizing temperature. During an interview on 9/22/24 at 5:42 PM, Resident #27 stated the food was cold by the time they got their tray in their room. Resident #27 stated it took the Certified Nurse Aide a half-hour to bring the tray to them, after they finished serving the residents in the dining room. During an interview on 09/23/24 at 11:36 AM, Resident #94 stated that the food was cold by the time they brought it to them. During a Resident Counsel Group meeting on…
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 · D2024-09-27 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 9/22/24 to 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that the residents had a right to make choices about aspects of his or her life in the facility that are significant to the resident for 1(Resident #110 ) of 1 residents reviewed for Choices. Specifically, Resident #110 was moved from their room(163) on 9/22/24 to another room(169) while the ceiling in their room was being repaired, and on 9/23/24 when the repair was completed, Resident #110 was not moved back into their room as per their preference until 9/26/24. The findings are: The facility policy titled Resident Room Changes dated 2/2016 and revised on 4/2024 documented that in recognition of the possible physical, mental, and psychological impact that a room change may produce, the facility makes every effort to lessen any negative effect that a room change may have on a resident, and the room change will be carried out in manner to maintain residents' rights…
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 · D2024-09-27 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 9/22/24 to 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that the residents had a right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior for 2 (Resident #34 and #110 ) of 5 residents reviewed for Environment. Specifically, the ceiling in room [ROOM NUMBER] on Unit 2 where Residents #34 and #110 resided, was observed with a large hole in the ceiling, a basin on the floor that was collecting water, with a bed pad underneath. The findings are: The undated facility policy titled Maintenance Work Order Policy documented that the Maintenance Department is responsible for maintaining the buildings, grounds, and equipment in a safe and operable manner at all times. On 09/22/24 at 06:21 PM, the ceiling in room [ROOM NUMBER] on unit 2 was observed with a big hole in the ceiling that was approximately 2.5 feet…
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 before2024-09-27 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 and complaint (NY00335402) survey from 9/22/2024 to 9/27/2024, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving misappropriation of resident property were reported to the New York State Department of Health. This was evident for 1 (Resident #49) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, the facility did not report an allegation that Resident #49's gold necklace was removed by a staff member and never returned to the resident. The findings are: The facility policy titled Resident Abuse dated 6/2023 documented any report of abuse will be reported in keeping with the New York State Department of Health regulations. Resident #49 was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease and cerebral infarction. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #49 was moderately cognitively impaired. A facility Investigation initiated 2/20/2024 documented Resident #49 and their designated representative…
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 · D2024-09-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review and observation during the recertification survey from 9/22/24-9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care consistent with professional standard of practice for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #105) reviewed for Respiratory Care. Specifically, oxygen was applied to Resident #105 and did not have a physician order. Findings include: Resident #105 had diagnoses including dependence on renal dialysis, chronic systolic heart failure (heart can't pump blood efficiently) and atrial fibrillation. (an irregular, often rapid heart rate). The 8/24/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set documented Resident #105 had intact cognition and did not document the resident was on oxygen therapy. The 4/24 Oxygen Administration Policy documented to verify there is a physician order for this procedure. Review the physician's orders for facility protocol for oxygen administration. A 9/11/24 nursing progress note documented at 4:00 AM, the resident complained of shortness of breath and their oxygen saturation on room air was…
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 · D2024-09-27 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 9/22/24 to 9/27/24, the facility did not ensure that the Physician reviewed the resident's total program of care, including medications, and treatments, at each visit for 1(Resident #107 ) of 1 residents reviewed for Hospice. Specifically, Resident #107 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], on Hospice, had no Physicians order to receive Hospice services. The findings are: The undated facility policy titled Physician Responsibilities documented that when a new resident is admitted to the nursing home, the physician conducts a thorough evaluation. This includes reviewing the resident's medical history, assessing current health conditions, and documenting any necessary treatments or interventions. Resident #107 was admitted with diagnoses including but not limited to Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, depression, and psychotic disorder. The 8/6/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set documented Resident #107 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 · D2023-10-18 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00311382), the facility did not immediately notify the designated representative (DR) and/or Health Care Proxy (HCP) when there was a significant change in Residents medical/clinical status. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for notification. Specifically, Resident #1 tested positive for covid on 02/15/2023. The HCP was not informed until 02/22/2023 when the HCP was contacted by the facility regarding Resident #1's chest X-ray results. The findings are: The Facility Policy titled Resident Rights and Quality of Life dated 05/2009 documented that each resident will have the right to participate in planning care and treatment or changes in care and treatment. Residents adjudged incompetent or otherwise found to be incapacitated under the laws of the State of New York shall have such rights exercised by a DR who will act on their behalf in accordance with State law; and the facility shall except in a medical emergency, consult with the resident immediately if the resident is competent, 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 · Ecited before2023-01-05 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 from 12/27/2022 -1/5/2023, the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of the resident population in accordance with resident needs identified in the facility assessment. Specifically, three of four resident care units reviewed for sufficient staff did not consistently have adequate staff to meet the needs of the residents as per the facility staffing minimum. In addition, during a Resident Counsel meeting held on 1/3/23, four residents (#38, 63, 37, and 75) verbalized that staffing was inadequate. The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure entitled Staffing dated 10/2022 documented the facility provides staff with the skills and competency necessary to provide care and services for all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment. The 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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure that care was provided in a manner to maintain dignity for 2 of 2 residents (#23 and #72) reviewed for dignity. Specifically, the urinary foley catheter tubing and drainage collection bag for Resident #23 and #72 were not covered with a privacy cover to prevent direct observation by other residents and their families. The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Resident Rights/Dignity dated 10/2022 documented the facility shall promote care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintains or enhances each resident's dignity and respect in recognition of a person-centered care approach. Resident #23 had diagnoses and conditions including Peripheral Vascular Disease, Neurogenic Bladder and Quadriplegia. The 9/26/22 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS; a resident assessment and screening tool) documented that Resident #23 had severely impaired cognition; was totally…
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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey conducted from 12/27/22 to 1/05/2023, the facility did not ensure that a resident's representative was made aware of the facility's bed hold policy before and upon transfer to a hospital for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Closed Record Review. Specifically, Resident #62 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] for an evaluation and the facility did not give advance notice of the bed hold policy to the resident/resident's representative prior to the transfer. The findings are: Resident #62 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus Type II and Bullous pemphigoid. The 9/19/22 admission MDS (Minimum Data Set - a resident assessment tool) documented a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 14, which indicated intact cognition. The 12/20/22 Transfer to the Hospital Summary documented the resident was transferred to the hospital and admitted for Acute Kidney Injury,…
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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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, interview, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey conducted from 12/27/2022 -1/5/2023, the facility did not ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #63) reviewed for ADL's. Specifically, Resident # 63 did not consistently receive twice a week showers as per the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) Accountability and the unit shower schedule. The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL) un dated documented a program of activities of daily living (ADL) is provided to prevent disability and return to a maximum level of independence. The policy further documented the resident self-image should be maintained. In addition, the resident will be offered shower/bed bath based on resident preference and schedule. Assistance will ne provided based on plan of care. Resident #63 was admitted with diagnoses which included Major Depressive Disorder, Disorder 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 · D2023-01-05 · 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 observations, record review, and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure a resident with limited range of motion (ROM) and mobility received appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and or to prevent further decrease in range of motion. Specifically, a splint device was not provided to the resident as per physician order. This was evident in 1 of 1 resident (Resident #66) reviewed for ROM care and services. The findings Are: The facility policy and procedure titled Splint, Braces, Casts and Immobilizers (assistive devices) undated documented the following: the facility will access each splint, brace, cast and immobilizer to ensure proper placement fitting, minimal pressure and proper placement and cleaning. Nursing and rehab will collaborate as necessary for resident safety and comfort. Resident #66 was admitted with diagnoses which included Peripheral Vascular Disease, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia and Anxiety. The 11/27/22 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented that the resident had severely impaired cognition,…
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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0801 — isolatedEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review during the Recertification Survey conducted between 12/27/2022-1/5/2023, the facility failed to employ qualified staff with the appropriate competencies and skills to carry out the function of the food and nutrition services. Specifically, the Diet technician was a full-time employee at the facility, but did not have a certification and the Registered Dietician was remotely employed 8 hours per week and did not report to the facility. The Findings include: The undated facility policy and procedure titled Nutritional assessment documented the Dietician in conjunction with the nursing staff and healthcare professionals will complete a nutritional assessment for each resident upon admission and as indicated by change in condition that places the resident at risk for impaired nutrition. During an interview conducted with the diet technician (DT) on 01/04/23 at 03:36 PM, they stated they are a diet tech with an associate degree. The DT stated they are supervised by the Registered Dietician. The DT stated they completed the nutrition assessments. DT…
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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a Recertification Survey conducted from 1/27/2022-1/4/2023 the facility did not ensure that each resident received, and was provided food that accommodated resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, for one Resident (#95) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. Specifically, the facility did not ensure Resident #95 who was allergic to pineapple was not given pineapple on their meal tray. The Findings are: The undated and revised 10/2017 Policy and Procedure titled Food and Nutrition Policy documented each resident was provided with a nourishing palatable well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs taking into consideration the preferences of each resident. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including but not limited to Dysphagia, Dementia and Parkinson. The 10/26/22 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment and required setup and supervision for meals 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 · Dcited before2023-01-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 12/27/22-1/05/23, the facility did not ensure that food was prepared and served in accordance with professional standards for food safety. This was evident during the Kitchen Task observation. Specifically, the cook and 2 food service technicians were observed in the kitchen with their face masks pulled down off their noses and mouths, the cook, who is bearded, was observed without a beard cover, and the Maintenance Assistant was observed in the kitchen without a hair net. The findings are: The undated facility policy titled, Hair Restraint documented that the food service employees are required to have all their hair covered and don a hairnet when preparing and serving food. On 12/27/22 at 09:46 AM during the initial kitchen tour, a bearded cook was observed without a beard cover and had their mask pulled down below their nose and mouth, a food service technician was observed without a hair net and the Food Service Director (FSD) was observed not wearing a face mask. On 12/28/22 at 09:13 AM during…
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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 interviews and record review during a Recertification Survey the facility did not ensure that medical records were maintained in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for each resident. Specifically, Nursing Staff documented on two occasions in medical record assistive devices were applied to prevent further decrease in range of motion when they were not being provided. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #66) reviewed for Positioning and Mobility. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure titled Splint, Braces, Casts and Immobilizers (assistive devices) undated documented the following: the facility will access each splint, brace, cast and immobilizer to ensure proper placement fitting, minimal pressure and proper placement and cleaning. Nursing and rehab will collaborate as necessary for resident safety and comfort. Resident #66 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which include Peripheral Vascular Disease, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia and Anxiety. The 11/27/2022 Quarterly 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 · D2023-01-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, interviews, and record reviews conducted during a Recertification Survey from 12/27/2022-1/4/2023 the facility did not ensure that an infection prevention and control program was established and maintained to prevent the transmission of a Multi Drug Resistant Organism for 1 of 1 (#47) resident reviewed for Infection Control. Specifically PTA #1 ( Physical Therapist Aide) did not use appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when providing services for Resident # 47, who had a Multi Drug resistant Organism and was on contact precautions. The findings are: Review of policy and procedure titled Infection Control dated 4/05 and revised 7/22 documented Transmission based precaution will be used in addition to standard precaution for residents with suspected infection and pathogens that can be transmitted by droplet or contact routes. Appropriate PPE (gloves, gowns, masks goggle etc.) will be available outside of the resident room as necessary, in an over the door isolation station or in the drawer bin directly outside the resident room. Resident # 47 was…
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 · D2019-09-04 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon observations, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that information regarding resident Advance Directive (a legal document in which a person specifies what actions should be taken if they are no longer able to make decisions for themselves because of illness or incapacity) was consistently and accurately documented for 1 (Resident #6) of 2 residents reviewed for Advance Directives. Specifically, the residents' physician's orders, certified nurse's aide care guide, and the hard copy medical record all documented the resident's Advance Directive status as Do Not Resuscitate (DNR; a legal order in respect of the wishes of a patient in case their heart were to stop or they were to stop breathing) and the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) and the Social Services unit resident's list documented the resident's Advance Directives status as a full code (full code status means that all possible measures are taken to revive a person 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 · Dcited before2019-09-04 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that an allegation of staff to resident abuse was fully investigated. Specifically, the facility did not conduct a full investigation regarding an allegation of staff to resident abuse made by the resident's family member. This was evident for one resident (Resident # 60) reviewed for abuse. The findings are: Resident # 60 has diagnoses and conditions including Hypertension, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Atrial Fibrillation. According to the 7/11/19 Quarterly Minimum Data Set( MDS; an assessment tool), the resident had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLS). During a family interview on 8/26/19 at 12:18 PM, the son of Resident # 60 stated that approximately six months ago on the evening shift a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA # 9) had his mother in her bathroom and the resident was screaming. He stated that when a nurse knocked on the bathroom door, he saw CNA # 9 reach up 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 · Dcited before2019-09-04 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that an allegation of staff to resident abuse was fully investigated. Specifically, the facility did not conduct a full investigation, including but not limited to resident assessment and staff interviews, regarding an allegation of staff to resident abuse made by the resident's family member, to determine if abuse occurred or if the incident should have been reported to the State. This was evident for one resident (Resident # 60). In addition, the facility did not ensure that an allegation of resident to resident abuse was fully investigated for 2 of 2 residents (#39 and #58). The findings are: 1. Resident # 60 has diagnoses and conditions including Hypertension, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Atrial Fibrillation. According to the 7/11/19 Quarterly Minimum Data Set( MDS; a resident assessment tool) the resident had severely impaired cognition, and required extensive…
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 · D2019-09-04 · 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
Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey the facility did not ensure that residents or their representatives were given timely written notification of the transfer and the reasons in a language and manner they understood. This was evident for 2 of 2 residents (#107 and #6) reviewed for hospitalization. The findings are: 1. Resident #107 has the following diagnoses and conditions: Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Diabetes Mellitus and Asthma. The Minimum Data Set (MDS-a resident assessment and screening tool) dated 7/13/19 indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of the nursing progress notes for 8/24/19 revealed the resident experienced a change in condition. The Physician was notified and ordered the resident be sent to the hospital. Record review indicated the resident family member was notified by phone only. Interview with the Social Worker on 9/4/19 at 11:16 AM revealed the facility does not send out written notification of transfer/discharge to the family and does not notify the Ombudsman's Office. Resident #6…
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 · D2019-09-04 · 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
Based on record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that interventions were implemented according to the plan of care. This was evident for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for implementation of the care plan. Specifically, 1. there was no documented evidence that a urinalysis (U/A) and culture and sensitivity (C/S) were obtained for a resident with symptoms of urinary tract infection ( UTI ) (Resident #102) 2. there was no documented evidence that a dialysis site was assessed for signs of infection. (Resident #108). The findings are: 1. Resident #102 was admitted with diagnoses including Hypertension, Parkinson Disease and Encephalopathy. The 7/26/19 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS; a resident assessment tool) documented resident #102 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, received extensive assist for toilet needs, and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the care plan revealed planned interventions for UTI related to a history of Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci (VRE) dated 7/9/19. It…
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 · D2019-09-04 · 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 record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that care and treatment was provided for a resident with a history of urinary tract infection (UTI). This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for urinary tract infection. (Resident #102). The findings are: 1. Resident #102 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hypertension, Parkinson's Disease, and Encephalopathy. The 7/26/19 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS; a resident assessment tool) revealed resident #102 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5/15 indicating severe cognitive impairment, received extensive assist for toilet needs, and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the care plan for UTI related to history of Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci (VRE) dated 7/9/19 included monitor for signs and symptoms (s/s) of infection and obtain a urine culture and sensitivity if ordered. The 8/22/19 Physician Notification Form indicated 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 · D2019-09-04 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #108) reviewed for dialysis that 1.there was ongoing communication between the dialysis center and the facility regarding the resident's response to dialysis treatment and 2. that nurses were assessing the dialysis site for signs and symptoms (s/s) of infection, bleeding, and the presence of bruit and thrill. The findings are: Resident #108 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including End Stage Renal Disease, Hypertension and Atrial Fibrillation. According to the physician's current orders, the resident is scheduled to be provided dialysis services three days weekly. The resident's plan of care dated 12/12/18 did not reflect how the facility would communicate with the dialysis center. Additionally, the plan of care did not include the frequency for monitoring the access area for redness/pain, and did not include assessment for s/s of infection, bleeding, 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 · D2019-09-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (#26) that the monthly medication regimen reviews (MMR) were consistently conducted by the consultant pharmacist. The finding is: Resident #26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Non Alzheimer Dementia, Anxiety, and Depression. The 3/31/19 Annual MDS (Minimum data Set: an assessment tool), revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further revealed the resident was prescribed an antipsychotic (Abilify), antidepressants (Trazadone and Celexa), an anticoagulant (Coumadin) and a diuretic (Lasix). Review of the record revealed the MMR reviews for the last 6 months were only completed on 2/28/19, 3/28/19 and 8/14/19. An interview was conducted on 8/30/19 at 1:30PM with the Assistant Director of Nursing. She stated that after checking the medical record, she could only find MMR reviews for 3 of the last 6…
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.
- 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
$9,620 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $9,620 — penalty dated 2024-09-27
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| COUNTY OF SULLIVAN | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/1957 |
| SUNSET LAKE CONSULTING LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/10/2025 |
| BUCK, NANCY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/26/2000 |
| HOLTON, MEGAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| PATEL, DEEPESH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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 335628. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-27, 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.