Central Queens Rehab & Nursing Center
69 95 Queens Midtown Expressway, Maspeth, NY 11378 · For profit - Corporation · 200 certified beds · (718) 429-2200 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- 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
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0570)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.1% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.0% | 5.8% | 5.4% | typical |
| 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 | 0.6% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 49.5% | 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 | 3.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.9% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.6% | 13.2% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.9% | 95.3% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.3% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.4% | 19.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.0% | 13.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 35.6% | 78.8% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.7% | 20.6% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.7% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.36 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.78 | 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.
30.1% 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 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 139 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 30.1%CMS range 19.6–41.4 | 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 | 11.5%CMS range 8.0–15.4 | 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 | 66.9% | 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 | 61.9% | 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 | 63.3% | 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 | 97.9% | 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 | 87.4% | 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 | 86.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.3% | 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 | 2.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.4%CMS range 4.9–11.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.78 | 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 200 beds and averages 194.6 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.97 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.09 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
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.
30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-04 · 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 interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 07/28/2025 to 08/04/2025, the facility did not ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity. This was evident for 1 (Resident #38) of 1 resident reviewed for Dignity out of 37 total sampled residents. Specifically, the Infection Control Preventionist was observed using profane language when speaking to Resident #38.The findings are: The facility's policy titled Quality of Life - Dignity last reviewed 01/2025 stated that each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect, and individuality. Staff shall speak respectfully to residents and staff shall treat cognitively impaired residents with dignity and sensitively, including addressing the underlying motives or root causes for behaviors. Resident #38 had diagnoses including Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder.The Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-04 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment was provided to the residents, and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly and comfortable interior were provided to the residents. This was evident on 1 (Unit 5) of 5 units. Specifically, on Rooms 501, 505, 507, 509, and 517, and the general residents' bathroom were observed with air conditioners with dirty and rusty grill covers, mismatched chipped paint in the residents' room, hole in the wall and unclean discolored bathroom heater. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Homelike Environment effective 1/2017 last reviewed date 1/2025 states it is the policy of Central Queens Rehabilitation and Nursing Center to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment to all residents. During multiple observations from 07/28/2025 at 10:00 AM to 08/04/2025 at 11:00 AM the following was observed: 1. 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 · Dcited before2025-08-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interview conducted during the Recertification and Complaint survey from 07/28/2025 to 08/04/2025, the facility did not ensure that a Comprehensive Care Plan for each resident was developed and implemented consistent with the resident rights that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing and mental psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. This was evident for 1 (Resident #82) of 1 resident reviewed for Hospice and End of Life out of 37 sampled residents. Specifically, there was no care plan created that addressed comfort care for Resident #82. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Care Planning with a review date of 01/2025 stated it is the facility policy to implement a Comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs. 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 · Dcited before2025-08-04 · 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 staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/28/2025 to 08/04/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident's Comprehensive Care Plans were reviewed and revised. This was evident for 1 resident reviewed for Dignity out of 37 sampled residents. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that the Comprehensive Care Plans for Mood State, Cognitive Loss/Dementia, Wandering/Elopement, Behavioral Symptoms (Verbally Abusive Behavior), and Behavioral Symptoms were reviewed and revised for Resident #38 after their last quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment was completed.The findings include:The facility policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Care Planning last reviewed 01/2025 stated that it is the facility's policy to implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial, and functional needs. The interdisciplinary team will review and update…
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 · D2025-08-04 · 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 Number of residents sampled: 5Number of residents cited: 1 Based on observation, record review and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that services provided or arranged by the facility as outlined by the Comprehensive Care Plan meet professional standards of quality including current evidence-based practice. This was evident for 1 (Resident #14) of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Meds, Chemical Restraints/Psychotropic Meds, and Med Regimen Review out of 37 sampled residents. Specifically, Licensed Nurses did not inform the Physician or the Physician Assistant when a resident with diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus had elevated blood glucose readings, of inconsistent blood glucose monitoring as per Physician's order of four times a day and of Resident's refusal of treatment as ordered by the Physician.The finding is: The Licensed Practical Nurse job description states charting and documentation includes transcribing physician's orders to resident charts,…
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 before2025-08-04 · 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 observation, record review and interview conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each resident received treatment and care in accordance with goals for care and professional standards of practice. This was evident for 1 (Resident #6) of 4 residents reviewed for Limited Range of Motion out of 38 sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #6, who had a history of limited neck flexion, and a Physician's order for cervical brace to be worn at all times except for skin check, hygiene, and exercise was observed on several occasions without them.The findings are:The facility's policy titled Assistive Device and Equipment Policy last reviewed on 1/20/25 stated it is the responsibility of the facility to ensure residents are provided with a safe environment. The policy also stated all recommendations for the use of devices and equipment are based on the comprehensive assessment and documented in the resident care plan, and direct care staff are trained and demonstrated…
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 before2025-08-04 · 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 observation, record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the Physician reviewed the resident's total program of care at each visit. This was evident for 1 (Resident #14) of 5 resident reviewed for Unnecessary Meds, Chemical Restraints/Psychotropic Meds, and Med Regimen Review out of 37 sampled residents. Specifically, there was no documented evidence the Physician addressed Resident #14's consistently high blood sugars and non-compliance with diabetic management. The findings include: The facility policy and procedure titled Diabetes Protocol with a review date of 1/2025 stated all residents will have their diabetes managed according to Physician recommendations and resident/resident representative preferences. The Physician will follow up on any acute episodes associated with significant sustained change in blood glucose levels or significant deterioration of previous glucose control and document resident status at subsequent visits until…
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 · E2025-02-12 · 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 observation, record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00339419 and NY00342391), the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, and mistreatment, are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities). This was evident in three (3) out of five (5) residents sampled (Residents #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3). Specifically, on 04/11/2024 at 12:50 PM, Registered Nurse #1 documented while monitoring residents at the start of their shift 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM, Resident #1 complained of pain in their private area and stated they think someone might have touched their private area because it hurts. Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital for further evaluation. The facility reported the incident to the New York State…
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 · F2023-07-26 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 7/19/2023 to 7/24/2023, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was evident during Kitchen observation. Specifically, cold sandwiches and milks were not maintained at the proper temperature of 41 degrees Fahrenheit (F) or below. The findings are: The facility policy titled Food Safety and Food Temperature dated 1/2023 documented food will be stored, prepared, handled, and served so risk of foodborne illness is minimized. During an observation of the kitchen on 7/21/23 at 11:19 AM, the Food Service Director (FSD) was calibrated a thermometer in the kitchen to test food items on the tray line. FSD removed two 8-ounce milks from residents' trays, two 8-ounce milks from dairy refrigerator, and two sandwiches from the tray line. Temperature checks of the cold items revealed: 1) an 8-ounce milk from first tray was 43.9 F, 2) an 8-ounce milk from another tray was 69 F, 3)…
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 · D2023-07-26 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated Survey from 7/19/23 to 7/26/23, the facility did not ensure that a resident was cared for in a manner that maintained or enhanced dignity. Specifically, a resident was observed on more than one occasion with no clothes on. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Dignity out of a sample of 35 residents. (Resident # 45) The findings are: The Facility's Policy titled 'Resident Right' last reviewed on January 2023, documented that it is the Policy of Central Queens Rehabilitation Center to treat all residents with kindness, respect and dignity. The policy also documented that Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic right to all residents of the facility. These rights include the resident's right to a dignified exitence. Resident # 45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Respiratory Failure, Cerebral Ischemia and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary…
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 20 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-26 · 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 Resident #168 Based on observations, interviews and record review conducted during the recertification and complaint survey from 7/19/23 to 7/24/23, the facility did not ensure that each resident has the right to make choices about aspects of life that are significant to the resident. This was evident for one (Resident #168) of six residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Specifically, Resident #168 was was not asked about bathing preferences when their shower schedule was created, and they were informed about their shower schedule. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Activities of Daily Living Supporting dated 1/23 documented residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and person, and oral hygiene. Resident #168 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of bilateral above knee amputation and muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-26 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, and staff interviews during the Recertification and abbreviated survey conducted from 7/19/23 to 7/26/25, the facility did not ensure that residents' privacy and confidentiality were maintained. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Privacy out of a total sample of 35 residents (Resident # 15). Specifically, Resident #15's privacy curtain was missing and left the resident exposed to everybody entering the room. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure on resident's right last reviewed on January 2023 document that employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect and dignity. The policy and procedure further documented that Federal and State laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents in the facility. These rights include the resident's right to privacy and confidentiality. On 7/19/2023 at 10:11 AM, Resident #15 was observed in bed talking to his roommate. No privacy curtain noted. On 7/19/2023 at 2:21 PM, Resident #15 was observed in bed talking 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 before2023-07-26 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews conducted during a Recertification survey from 07/19/2023 to 07/26/2023, the facility did not ensure a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment was maintained. This was evident for 1 (2nd Floor) of 5 Units. Specifically, resident rooms were observed with mismatched paint and dry wall patches, clutter including multiple cardboard boxes and food containers, rusty and cracked light fixtures, ripped fall mats, ripped leather on a resident's recliner, and ripped and dirty privacy curtains. The findings are: The policy titled Care of Equipment revised 01/31/2023 documented curtains observed to be soiled or in disrepair should be reported to the Maintenance department for immediate removal and resolution. All equipment in disrepair should be communicated to the Maintenance department in a timely manner. On 7/19/2023 between 9:47 AM and 3:33 PM, the following was observed on the 2nd Floor: -room [ROOM NUMBER] had fall mats on the floor by resident beds with ripped…
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 · D2023-07-26 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 survey from 7/19/2023 to 7/26/2023, the facility did not ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment was completed within 14 days of admission. This was evident for Resident #157 reviewed for Resident Assessment out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #157's admission MDS was not completed within 14 days of their admission to the facility. The findings are: The facility policy titled Submission and Correction of the MDS Assessments dated 1/19/2023 documented the MDS completion date for admission assessments must be no later than 13 days after the entry date. Resident # 157 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of sepsis and metabolic Encephalopathy. The admission MDS assessment for Resident #157 had an assessment reference date of 1/31/2023 and a completion date of 3/5/2023, more than 14 days after admission. On 07/25/23 at 11:37 AM, the MDS Coordinator (MDSC) was interviewed and stated they were…
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 · D2023-07-26 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 interview conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/19/2023 to 07/26/2023, the facility did not ensure the resident and their representatives were provided with a written summary of the baseline care plan (BCP). This was evident for 2 (Resident #43 and #387) of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1) Resident #43's representative was to provide with a copy of the BCP and, 2) Resident #387 was not provided with a copy of their BCP. The findings are: The facility policy titled Care Plans - Baseline dated 01/2023 documented the resident and their representative will be provided a summary of the baseline care plan. 1) Resident #43 had diagnoses of cerebral infarction and schizoaffective disorder. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #43 had severely impaired cognition , did not participate in the assessment, and the resident's family or significant other participated in the assessment and goal setting. On 07/25/2023 at 4:10 PM,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-26 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 7/19/2023 to 7/24/2023, the facility did not ensure an effective discharge planning process was developed and implemented. This was evident for 1 (Resident #82) of 3 residents reviewed for Discharge out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, documents needed for discharge planning were not submitted to another facility per Resident #82's request. The findings are: The policy titled Discharging the Resident dated 1/2023 documented the facility will facilitate a safe discharge for the residents. Resident #82 had diagnoses of peripheral venous insufficiency and opioid dependence. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #82 was cognitively intact, participated in the assessment, expected to be discharged to the community, and discharge planning was in progress. During the interview on 7/19/23 at 11:57 AM, Resident #82 stated they requested a transfer to another facility 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 · D2023-07-26 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/19/2023 to 07/26/2023, the facility did not provide an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. This was evident for Resident #95 reviewed for Activities out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #95 was not provided with television (TV) stations in their preferred language. The findings are: The facility policy titled Activity Evaluation dated 1/2023 documented the activity evaluation is conducted to help develop an activity plan that reflects the choices and interests of the residents. Preferences are included in the evaluation. The facility policy titled TV Channel dated 3/20/2018 documented the facility offered regular TV channels (2-21), two Spanish channels, and one movie channel (6). Resident # 95 had diagnoses of cerebral infarction and unspecified…
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 · D2023-07-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interview conducted during the recertification and abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure a Physician order on oxygen tubing was followed to prevent the transmission of infectious disease. This was evident for 1 (Resident #14) of 2 residents reviewed for Respiratory Care out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, Resident #14's oxygen tubing was not changed in accordance with Physician Order (PO). The findings are: Resident #14 was admitted with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #14 was cognitively intact and required the extensive assistance of 2 people for bed mobility. On 7/19/2023 at 10:36 AM, 7/20/2023 at 11:39 AM, and 7/21/2023 at 10:43 AM, Resident #14 was observed in bed receiving continuous oxygen via nasal canula. Oxygen tubing dated 7/11/2023 connected Resident #14's nasal canula to the oxygen concentrator. The PO dated 6/5/2023…
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 before2023-07-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interviews conducted during a recertification survey from 7/19/2024 to 7/24/2024, the facility did not ensure that all drugs and biologicals were labeled in accordance with professional standards. This was evident for 2 (2nd and 3rd Floor) of 3 medication rooms. Specifically, 1) two boxes of expired flu vaccines were observed in the 3rd Floor medication room, and 2) one box of expired covid vaccines was observed in the 2nd Floor medication room. The findings are: The facility policy titled Medication Storage dated January 2023 documented discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals are returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed. 1) On 07/25/2023 at 02:37 PM, the 3rd Floor medication room refrigerator was observed with two boxes of influenza Afluria quadrivalent vaccines 2022-2023 formula (20 prefilled syringes 0.5 ml/dose) with expiration date of 06/30/2023. On 07/25/2023 at 02:50 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 was interviewed and stated all nurses are responsible for checking medication expiration dates. The night…
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 · D2023-07-26 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 7/19/2023 to 7/24/2023, the facility did not ensure garbage and refuse was disposed of properly. This was evident during kitchen observation. Specifically, the garbage compactor door was observed ajar, and multiple flies were observed flying on top of garbage inside the compactor. The findings are: The facility policy titled Kitchen Garbage and Refuse Disposal dated 1/2023 documented food related garbage and refuse are disposed of in accordance with current state laws. During an observation of the kitchen on 7/24/23 at 10:44 AM, Dietary Worker (DW) #1 was brought the garbage to the garbage disposal area located outside near the facility staff parking lot. The garbage compactor was ajar and multiple flies were observed flying on top of the garbage piled inside the compactor. On 7/24/23 at 10:51 AM, DW #1 was interviewed and stated the compactor door should have been kept closed to keep flies and pest away from the garbage. DW #1 did not know why the compactor door was left open. 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 · E2021-05-20 · tag F0570 — patternAssure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey the facility did not ensure a surety bond was purchased to provide assurance satisfactory to the Secretary, to assure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility. Specifically, the surety bond held by the facility did not cover the total amount of resident personal funds deposited with the facility. This was evident for 100 of 134 residents who maintained personal funds accounts at the facility. The finding is: On 05/20/2021 the facility submitted a document titled Midway Nursing Home Disbursement Worksheet dated 05/19/2021 which showed a total balance of resident's funds in the amount of $327,083,00. The facility presented a surety bond dated 12/20/2020 to 12/20/2021 in the amount of $140,000. The facility did not ensure that the surety bond was sufficient to cover all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility. On 05/20/2021 at 10:10 AM, an interview was conducted with the Facility Administrator (FA). The FA stated that the surety…
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 before2021-05-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interviews conducted during a Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure that a comprehensive person-centered care plan was developed and implemented for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs. Specifically, 1). a care plan was not created for a resident with a diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus, and 2). A care plan was not implemented for a resident on fluid restrictions. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Nutrition and 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Respiratory Care and of out of a sample of 27 residents (Resident #7 and Resident #34). The findings are: The facility policy titled Comprehensive Care Plan Development and Meetings dated November 28, 2016 documented that it is the policy of Midway Nursing Home that each resident admitted to the facility will have a Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) completed in accordance with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-05-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 observations, record reviews and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure that a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices. Specifically, 1). Physician's order were not implemented for a resident receiving oral chemotherapy anti-hypertensive medications with special order requirements and monitoring and 2). fluid restriction for a resident with edema was not implemented. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living and 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Respiratory Care out of a sample of 27 residents. (Resident # 114 and Resident #34). The findings are: 1. Resident # 114 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Hypertension and Cancer of the breast. (a). Physician's order dated 2/5/2020 and renewed on 4/29/2021 documented Ibrance 125 milligram (mg) 1 tablet (tab) daily (OD)…
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 · D2021-05-20 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 interview conducted during a Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) accurately reflected the resident's status. Specifically, diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) was not captured on the MDS. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Respiratory Care and of 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Nutrition out of a sample of 27 residents (Resident #20 and Resident #7). The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Assessment, MDS and Care Planning with an effective date of 09/01/2011 documented that information obtained from the comprehensive assessment enables the staff to plan care that focuses on the resident's ability to achieve higher or highest practicable mode of functioning that includes but is not limited to the following medically defined condition and Past Medical History. 1) Resident #20 was admitted to the facility with diagoses that included Asthma, Respiratory Failure,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-05-20 · 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 interviews and record reviews during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure each resident or resident representative was given the opportunity to participate in the review and revision of the care plan. Specifically, a resident was not invited to participate in their care plan meeting. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Care Plan out of a sample of 27 residents. (Resident #71). The findings are: The facility policy dated 11/28/2016 documented the CCP (Comprehensive Care Plan) will be reviewed and revised periodically by the interdisciplinary team. The resident and/or their representative will view and sign the comprehensive person centered care plan. The policy also documented that the resident would be invited to their CCP and renminded the day of the meeting. Documentation will be performed in the resident's clinical record by the team member reminding the resident. admission MDS dated [DATE] documented diagnoses that included Coronary Artery Disease,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-05-20 · 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 observation, record review and staff interview conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure that the facility review the resident's total program of care, including medications, and treatments, at each visit. Specifically, there was no documented evidence of medical follow-up for a resident admitted with a diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). This was evidenced for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Nutrition out of a sample of 27 residents (Resident # 7). The finding is: The facility policy dated March 1, 2021 titled Physician Services documented that it is the policy of Midway Nursing Home to provide Physician Services in accordance with State and Federal Regulations. The policy also documented that the physician will review the resident's total program of care, including medications and treatments, at each visit. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, and Human Immunodeficiency Virus…
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 · D2021-05-20 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure timely identification and removal from current medication supply of medications for disposition. Specifically, an opened bottle of medication was observed in the medication cart past the expiration date. This was evident on 1 of 5 units reviewed for Medication Storage (Unit 3). The facility policy and procedure titled Expired Medication dated 3/20/2015 documented all medication carts, cabinets and refrigerators will be routinely checked by nursing personnel. All expired medications will be removed and discarded. The procedure included on a weekly basis, 11-7 nurse will check all above-mentioned areas for any expired medications. Same will be discarded. The central supply clerk will also check inventory in supply room as well as cabinets on units for any expired medications. Same will be discarded. The form titled Nursing dept Audit Tool dated 5/15/2021 documented yes that discontinued or expired medications are removed from 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 · Dcited before2021-05-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure medication and biologicals drugs were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. Specifically, 1). the facility did not ensure the multidose medications were properly labeled with opening date and resident name on the bottle and vial, and 2). insulin pens were not stored in a manner to prevent cross-contamination. This was evident on 1 of 5 units reviewed during the Medication Storage and Labeling Task. The findings are: On 5/20/2021 at 12:28 pm, the medication cart on the 6th Floor was observed. 8 bottles of Artificial Tears were observed stored in boxes. 6 of the bottles had no resident names or dates eyedrops were opened labeled on the bottles. In addition, 1 Admelog insulin pen and 2 Lantus Solostar insulin pens were observed placed loosely in the tray of the medication cart and were not stored separately from each other. An interview was conducted immediately with Licensed Nurse Practical (LPN) #5. LPN #5 stated insulin…
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 · D2021-05-20 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 staff interview conducted during a Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure that special eating equipment and utensils were provided for residents who need them. Specifically, during a lunch meal a resident was not provided with an insulated mug with lid that was ordered. This was observed during the Dining Observation Task for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications out of a sample of 27 residents (Resident #45). The finding is: The facility policy titled Adaptive Feeding Service Program dated February 2019 documented that it is the policy of Midway Nursing Home that residents will be evaluated as needed and will receive necessary adaptive devices for meals to ensure completion of meals and to enhance their quality of life and to reach their highest level of independence. Resident # 45 was admitted with diagnoses that included Coronary Artery Disease, Cerebrovascular Accident and Depression. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment…
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 · D2021-05-20 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not maintain clinical records on each resident in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that were complete and accurately documented. Specifically, the physician frequently documented an incorrect gender and age of residents in the clinical records. This was evident for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications out of a sample of 27 residents. (Residents #5 and 74). The findings are: Resident #74 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included Anxiety Disorder and Depression. On 05/18/21 at 10:45 AM, the resident was observed in the room, alert and awake. The resident was well groomed and looked age appropriate. On 05/18/21, a review of resident's face sheet was conducted. The resident's face sheet documented that the resident year of birth as 1953 ([AGE] years of age) and resident's gender as female. On 05/18/21, a review of medical record revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KALTER, MOSHE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | 46% | since 01/05/2009 |
| STRAUSS, JEREMY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 9% | since 01/01/2023 |
| FARKAS, LEVI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/09/2023 |
| RAYZBERG, LEONID | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2023 |
| YOUNESI, PEYMAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/03/2019 |
| FOGEL, AARON | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/05/2009 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.6M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 335472. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-04, 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.