Terence Cardinal Cooke Health Care 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.

36.2% 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 447 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 78.2% 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 266 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 679 beds and averages 513.2 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 166 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.38 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 3.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.52 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.54 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/21/2024 to 10/28/2024, the facility did not ensure infection control practices and procedures were maintained. This was evident in 2 (Resident #208 and Resident #269) of 4 residents reviewed for Infection Control out of 37 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1.) Licensed Practical Nurse #6 failed to perform hand hygiene and glove changes while performing wound treatment for Resident #208 and 2. ) Enhanced Barrier Precautions were not maintained when Licensed Practical Nurse #5 flushed Resident #269's indwelling urinary catheter. In addition, Licensed Practical Nurse #5 failed to clean / sanitize the Resident's bedside table after using it for the procedure. The findings are: 1. ) The facility policy titled Pressure Ulcer Protocol with a revision date of 03/2020 documented that the purpose of the policy is to promote the healing of pressure ulcers that are present including prevention of infection to the extent possible. Resident #208 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/21/2024 to 10/28/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents are treated with respect and dignity and cared for in a manner that promotes maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. This was evident in 1 (Resident #28) of 1 resident reviewed for dignity. Specifically, Resident #28 was observed wearing the same outfit two days in a row. The findings are: The facility policy titled Resident [NAME] of Rights with a revision date of 02/24/2023 documented that residents have a right to be treated with consideration, respect, and full recognition of their dignity and individuality, including privacy in treatment and in care of their personal needs. Resident #28 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that include Hypertension, Hemiparesis and Diabetes Mellitus. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) dated 09/29/2024 documented that Resident #28 had intact cognition and impaired vision. The Minimum Data Set…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY00349557) Survey, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from sexual abuse. This was evident in 2 (Residents #447 and #463) of 6 residents reviewed for abuse out of 37 total sampled residents. Specifically, on 07/26/2024 at approximately 6:00 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant #4 observed Residents #447 and #463 lying in bed with no undergarments. Resident #447's hand was observed touching Resident #463's private area. The findings are: The facility policy titled Clinical, Resident Abuse Reporting and Investigation Protocol with a revision date of 06/27/2024 documented the facility will protect residents and ensure freedom from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, misappropriation of property, exploitation corporal punishment, and involuntary seclusion. The Accident/Incident Investigation Form dated 07/26/2024 at 6:00 PM documented that the Certified Nursing Assistant on duty found Resident #447 and Resident #463…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-28 · 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, record review, and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/21/2024 to 10/28/2024, the facility did not ensure that a person-centered Comprehensive Care Plan was developed and implemented to meet the resident's goals, and address the resident's medical, physical, mental and psychosocial needs. This was evident in 1 (Resident #28) of 2 residents reviewed for care planning out of 37 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #28 who had a diagnoses and was receiving treatment for Glaucoma, had no comprehensive care plan developed to address the Resident's impaired vision. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Comprehensive Care Plan with a revision date of 06/23/2020 documented that the comprehensive care plan will include measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, psychosocial needs, cultural, and trauma informed care if appropriate that are identified from the comprehensive assessment. The policy documented that 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-28 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/21/2024 to 10/28/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident received food that accommodated resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences. This was evident in 1 (Resident #841) of 3 residents reviewed out of 37 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #841, who had a documented allergy to fish and fish containing products, received a lunch tray containing fish. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Special Food Needs, Swallowing/chewing difficulties, and Food Allergies with a revision date of 01/2024 documented that all food and beverages served will be assessed and determined safe for residents with special dietary needs, including those with food allergies. The policy documented that all new residents, diet order changes, and allergy information is printed via the network printer to the diet office. The Diet Clerk is responsible for entering the resident's name, room…

  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 · D2023-08-18 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (NY00303407), the facility did not ensure that an alleged violation involving abuse was reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the State Survey Agency, New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH). This was evident in 1 out of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1). Specifically, on 10/05/22 at approximately 8:20PM, two Police Officers showed up at the facility to speak Resident #1 regarding an allegation of abuse. The facility initiated the investigation on 10/05/22 and reported the abuse allegation to NYSDOH on 10/06/22. The allegation of abuse was not reported within two hours. The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure for Clinical, Resident Abuse Reporting and Investigation Protocol most recent review date 06/2022,…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-10-06 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the accuracy of a resident's assessment. This was evident for 1 (Resident #77) of 7 residents reviewed for Accidents out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, the Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment documented Resident #77 had wandering behavior and using a Wander/elopement alarm. The findings are: The facility policy titled MDS last reviewed 07/2017 documented interdisciplinary (IDT) members must verify the accuracy of assessment and the MDS is signed, certifying completion and accuracy. Resident #77 had diagnoses of atrial fibrillation and cerebral infarction. The MDS dated [DATE] documented Resident #77 was cognitively intact, wandered daily, ad used a Wander/elopement alarm daily. On 10/3/22 at 12:50 PM and 10/6/22 at 11:14 AM, Resident #77 was observed in their room or sitting in the dayroom. Resident #77 was not observed with wandering behavior and did not have 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-10-06 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create 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 interviews conducted during a Recertification Survey from 09/29/22 to 10/06/22, the facility did not ensure that the resident and their representative were provided with a written summary of the Baseline Care Plan (BCP). This was evident for 1 resident of 1 resident reviewed for Tube Feeding, and 1 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Meds, out of 38 sampled residents. (Residents #170 and #387) The findings are: The facility policy titled Baseline Care Plan effective November 2017 and reviewed 07/2021 documented that the facility provides the Resident and the Representative with a written summary of the Baseline Care Plan .The Team Members evaluate Resident within 48 hours of admission, completes initial assessment, develop initial care plan based on identified concerns .if CP reviewed via telephone, will be sent via certified mail to the family, certified return receipt placed in resident's medical record. 1). Resident #170 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-06 · 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 observations, staff interview and record review conducted during a Recertification and Complaint survey (NY00295603) from 09/29/22 to 10/06/22, the facility did not ensure that a person-centered care plan with measurable goals, time frames and interventions were developed and implemented to address resident concerns, consistent with the resident rights to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Specifically, 1). a Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) was not developed and implemented for a resident with diagnosis of Uterine prolapse and 2). a CCP was not developed and implemented for resident with impaired skin integrity. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for UTI/Catheter and 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Skin Conditions out of 38 sampled residents (Residents #417 and #6). The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Care Plan dated September 1st, 2007 and last revised on September 28th 2022 documented 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-10-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 9/29/2022 to 10/6/2022, the facility did not ensure that resident's Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) was reviewed and revised to accurately reflect the current residents status. Specifically, 1). Activities of Daily Living and a respiratory care plan was not reviewed and revised in a timely manner, and 2). A comprehensive care plan was not reviewed and revised for a resident with a history of a fall. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Respiratory Care and 1 of 7 residents reviewed for Accidents out of 38 sampled residents (Residents #83 & Resident #332) The findings are: The facility policy and procedure title Comprehensive Care Plan dated 09/01/2007 and last revised on 09/20/2022 documented that a written comprehensive care plan is developed and maintained for each resident to attain or maintain the resident highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing. The Comprehensive Care…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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 ARCHCARE — 7 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 30 rows in the source record cover these 27 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

What families pay in NY