Degraff Memorial Hospital-Skilled Nursing Facility

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.

51.8% 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 78 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 46.7% 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 30 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 82% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 14% — 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 80 beds and averages 77.0 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 3 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.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.43 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.60 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.15 to 0.45 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%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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.

• Potential for harm · Ddisputed · IDR2026-06-02 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during a survey, the facility failed to follow the manufacturers' recommendations and specifications for installing and maintaining bed rails for two (2) (Resident #2 and Resident #74) of two (2) residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #2 and Resident #74 had a bed assist rail that was not secured to its bed frame. The findings include: The facility policy and procedure titled Transfer/Bed Mobility Bar, revised 02/24/2026, documented when installing transfer bars, the facility would follow manufacturer recommendations to ensure that the transfer bars were compatible with the bed frame and mattress and follow manufacturer instructions to ensure bed rails did not pose a risk for entrapment. Transfer bars would be inspected on a quarterly basis to ensure proper operation. Review of bed type A's manual revealed the Operating Instructions section included the following warning: Test the Pivot Assist to ensure that it was properly latched before leaving the patient. Review of bed type B's manual revealed the Safety…

  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 · D2025-12-08 · 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, interview, and record review conducted during an Abbreviated survey (Complaint #2678647), the facility did not ensure that all alleged abuse violations were reported immediately but not later than two (2) hours after the allegation was made to the Administrator of the facility and to the State Survey Agency for one (1) (Resident #1) of three (3) residents reviewed. Specifically, staff did not report an allegation of physical abuse to the Administrator immediately which resulted in delayed reporting to the New York State Department of Health within the required time frames. The finding is:The policy titled Identification and Reporting of Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, or Mistreatment of a Skilled Nursing Facility Resident, as per Public Health Law Section 2803-d last revised on 10/22/24 documented any nursing home employee or volunteer who becomes aware of abuse, mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation shall immediately report their concerns to the Nursing Home Administrator or designee. The Long-Term Care Administrator will report abuse to 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-10-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — widespread
  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 observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during a complaint investigation (NY00346092) conducted during an extended standard survey from 9/26/2024 to 10/3/2024, the facility did not to ensure that each resident receives adequate supervision to prevent accidents for three (Residents #12, 14, and 29) of three reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not monitor the wander guard signaling device's (tag/bracelet) battery life/functionality of those that were assigned (#12, 14, 29) and Resident #14 exited the building unsupervised without staff's knowledge. In addition, the facility staff lacked education and training regarding the wander alert system and policy. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled WanderGuard dated 12/2022 documented all batteries of activated bracelet signaling devices are continuously monitored by the wander guard computer system and, if a battery is low, an alarm on the computer will be activated and identify the low battery; and nursing will be responsible 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 · F2024-10-03 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
  Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review conducted during an extended survey completed on 10/3/24, the facility's quality assurance and performance improvement program did not perform improvement activities that tracked adverse resident events, analyze their causes, and implement preventative actions and mechanisms that include feedback and learning throughout the facility. Specifically, the facility did not ensure their WanderGuard policy was updated; that staff were educated about the wander guard system, and did not ensure preventive actions were implemented to ensure resident safety. The finding is: Refer to: F 689 - Free from Accident Hazards/Supervision and Devices to Prevent Accidents The 2024 Facility Assessment Review dated 2/6/2024 documented the facility assessment was used to determine gaps in service or expected outcomes, when identified, are reviewed and correction plans are discussed for implementation. The corrective activities are then review during subsequent meetings to assure changes are sustained and there is no recurrence of the issue. The policy and procedure…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-03 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor 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

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Extended survey completed on 10/3/24, the facility did not exercise reasonable care for the protection of the resident's property from loss or theft for one (Resident #51) of three residents reviewed for personal property. Specifically, Resident #51 had no pants available to wear in their closet and their inventory sheets documented the resident had 17 pairs of pants. The finding is: Resident #51 had diagnoses including dementia, age related physical debility, and high blood pressure. The Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) dated 8/11/24 documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition. The comprehensive care plan dated 8/21/24 documented the resident required extensive assistance with dressing, was non ambulatory, and was not able to make their needs known. During a telephone interview on 9/27/24 at 9:54 AM, the resident's family member stated when they came to visit, the resident would be wearing clothes that were too small for them, like they weren't the clothes they had brought in for 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  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 an Extended Recertification survey completed on 10/3/24, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #2) of four residents reviewed for infection control processes during care. Specifically, staff did not wear proper personal protective equipment during hands on care and transfer of the resident, who required enhanced barrier precautions. The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions dated 6/18/24 documented personal protective equipment is used to prevent the spread of multi-drug resistant organism transmission. The recommendations include the use of enhanced barrier precautions during high-contact activities for residents with chronic wounds (open wounds that typically require a dressing change such as…

  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
• No harm found · B2026-06-02 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review during a survey, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures for screening employees that would prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents, and misappropriation of resident property. Specifically, an employee that worked in the facility and was subject to the New York State Nurse Aide Registry Verification, was not reviewed through the New York State Nurse Aide Registry prior to their employment as required. This affected one (1) (Environmental service Aide #1) of five (5) employees that worked in the facility and were subject to being reviewed through the New York State Nurse Aide Registry prior to their employment as required. The findings include: The facility's policy and procedure titled LTC Criminal History Record Check (CHRC) and NYS Nurse Aide Registry, revised 05/06/2025, documented:- the policy was established to ensure candidates for employment (New Hires, Re-Hires, Agency) and current employees (Internal Transfers) complete a Criminal History Background Check and a New York State (NYS)…

  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

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 33 rows in the source record cover these 30 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.

What families pay in NY