Orchard Rehabilitation & Nursing Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

36.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 50 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 77.4% 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 31 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 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 63% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 160 beds and averages 150.3 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.15 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 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 2.50 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.42 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2025-09-02 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespread
  Provide 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

  Based on interview and record review conducted during a Complaint investigation (NY00358687-745392) completed on 09/02/2025, the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing of each resident. Specifically, the facility did not ensure there was sufficient nurse staffing to meet the needs of the residents in accordance with their preferences and plans of care. The finding is:Review of the Dear Administrator letter 23-11 dated 06/30/23 sent to the nursing home administrators informing them that starting 04/01/2022 nursing homes were required to have an average daily staffing of 3.5 hours of care per resident per day with 2.2 hours for Certified Nurse Aides and 1.1 hours for Licensed Practical Nurses or Registered Nurses.The policy Nursing Staffing, revised 04/28/2025 documented the facility shall maintain sufficient nursing staff, including licensed nurses and nurse aides, to provide nursing and related services that ensure resident safety and the attainment or maintenance of the highest…

  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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-02 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure 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, interview, and record review conducted during a Complaint investigation (NY00358687- 745392) the facility did not ensure food and drink were provided/served at a safe and appetizing temperatures. Specifically, food and beverages during the lunch meal were served at suboptimal temperatures and were not palatable.Residents #1, #4, #5, #6, and #7 involved. The finding is: The policy Safe Food Temperature and Danger Zone Compliance dated 04/2025 documented the facility will maintain strict control of food temperatures to prevent the growth of harmful bacteria. All food will be stored, cooked, held, and served at temperatures that comply with New York State Department of Health requirements, CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services), and ServSafe guidelines (guidelines that focus on essential food safety practices, including personal hygiene, cross-contamination prevention, time and temperature control, and cleaning and sanitation). The temperature danger zone is defined as 41 degrees Fahrenheit to 135 degrees Fahrenheit. During observation 08/28/2025 at 11:40…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure 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, interview, and record review conducted during the Standard survey completed on 4/16/24, the facility did not provide food and drink that was at a safe and appetizing temperature for four (Main Dining Room, Unit 1, Unit 2, and Unit 3) of four test trays. Specifically, food and beverages during meals were served at suboptimal temperatures. Residents #85, #74, #51, #4, and #1, were involved. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Dietary Food Preparation and Service dated 5/2/23, documented that food and nutrition service employees prepare and serve food in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. The danger zone for food temperatures is between 41 degrees Fahrenheit and 135 degrees Fahrenheit. This temperature range promotes for the rapid growth of pathogenic microorganisms that cause foodborne illness. Potentially hazardous foods include meats, poultry, seafood, cut melon, eggs, milk, yogurt, and cottage cheese. The longer foods remain in the danger zone the greater the risk for growth of harmful pathogens. Therefore, potentially…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during a Standard survey completed on 4/16/24, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, three (Unit 1, Unit 2, and Unit 3) of three-unit nourishment refrigerators, one of one main kitchen, and one (Main dining room and Unit 3 Dining Room) of two serveries observed had issues. The nourishment room refrigerators contained undated, unlabeled, and out of date food and drink items. The kitchen had a greasy oven door, the splatter guard behind the stove was heavily soiled with dried brown/black grease; a commercial coffee maker and its carafes were heavily soiled with coffee stains, and there was a rusty and dusty desk fan under the tray line. In addition, the cook was observed in the main dining room not following proper hand hygiene while serving a meal. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Proper Food and Drink Storage and Labeling 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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, interview, and record review conducted during a Standard survey completed on 4/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that the residents' environment remained as free from accident hazards as possible, and each resident receives adequate supervision for one (Resident #116) of one resident reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not implement their smoking policy to ensure that comprehensive quarterly assessments were completely to ensure safe smoking practices. Additionally, the was no compressive care plan developed for smoking. The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Smoking Policy, dated 10/2017, documented all residents that express a desire to smoke will have a smoking assessment completed to determine their safety and physical ability to smoke. This assessment will be completed on admission, readmission, quarterly and as needed. The policy and procedure further documented residents who are determined to smoke independently, will be required to surrender all smoking materials to…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-16 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — isolated
  Ensure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
  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 Standard survey completed [DATE], the facility did not ensure any individual working in the facility as a nurse aide for more than 4 months was competent to provide nursing and nursing related services for one of five staff (Resident Assistant #1) reviewed for training. Specifically, Resident Assistant #1 functioned in the role of a nurse aide for greater than 4 months without receiving nurse aide certification. The finding is: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services published guidance for expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency (QSO-23-13-ALL), dated [DATE], documented that previously Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services had waived the requirement that the facility may not employ anyone for longer than four months unless they met training and certification requirements. QSO-23-13-ALL documented that all individual waivers granted would expire prior to the end of the public health emergency and the uncertified nurse aides working in…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-04-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during a Standard survey completed on 4/25/22, the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person- centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights and that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing and mental and psychosocial needs for three residents (Resident #22, 41 and 53) of 25 residents reviewed. Specifically, there was no comprehensive care plan developed for use of anticoagulant (blood thinner) for Resident #41; the facility did not ensure Resident #22 had their right-hand palm guard (assistive device that positions the fingers away from the palm) in place per the physician's order and Resident #53 was not supervised in common areas per the plan of care. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Comprehensive Care Planning revised date 4/1/22 documented an individualized person-centered comprehensive care plan (CCP) will be initiated 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-04-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review completed during a Standard survey conducted from 4/18/22 through 4/25/22, the facility did not ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing for one (Resident #41) of one resident reviewed. Specifically, Resident #41's right heel was not floated in bed to off-load pressure from the wound per the Wound Consultant's recommendations. The findings are: The policy and procedure (P/P) titled Pressure Injury Prevention & Management/ Wound Rounds dated 9/29/16 documented it is the policy of the facility to assess all residents for risk of pressure injuries and to have an appropriate interdisciplinary preventive care plan implemented when indicated. Residents with existing pressure injuries will be evaluated and managed in accordance with the facility's established clinical practice guidelines. The Nurse is responsible for the following when a pressure ulcer is identified:…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2019-06-21 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
  Ensure 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 interview and record review conducted during the Standard Survey completed on 6/21/19, the facility did not ensure that the pharmacist reported irregularities to the attending physician and the facility's Medical Director and Director of Nursing (DON). Specifically, one (Resident #137) of five residents reviewed for drug regimen reviews had issues involving the lack of the Consultant Pharmacist's identification and recommendations regarding the continued use of Ativan (antianxiety medication) without an attempt for a gradual dose reduction (GDR). The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Medication Regimen Reviews dated 4/18 documented the consultant pharmacist performs a comprehensive medication regimen review (MRR) at least monthly. The MRR includes evaluating the resident's response to medication therapy to determine that the resident maintains the highest practicable level of functioning and prevents or minimizes adverse consequences related to medication therapy. The consultant pharmacist…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2019-06-21 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
  Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
  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 Standard survey completed on 6/21/19, the facility did not ensure that residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions (GDR), and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs for one (Resident #137) of five residents reviewed for psychotropic medications. Specifically, Resident #137 lacked GDR attempts for the psychotropic medication Ativan (antianxiety medication), and the lack of documented evidence of behaviors to support the continued use of the medication. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure titled Medication Regimen Reviews(MRR) dated 4/2018 revealed the MMR included evaluating the resident's response to medication therapy to determine that the resident maintains the highest practicable level of functioning and prevents or minimizes adverse consequences related to medication therapy. The consultant pharmacist identifies irregularities through a…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PERSONAL HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT — 21 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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 73% 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. This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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