Mount Sinai South Nassau T C U

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.

73.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 434 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 9.4% 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 383 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 1.77 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 100% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 34% 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 20 beds and averages 18.1 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 2 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 6.14 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 4.06 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 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 4.58 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.77 on weekdays — 32% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 4.54 to 2.89 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% 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.

• Potential for harm · D2024-10-22 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 10/17/2024 and completed on 10/22/2024, the facility did not ensure that each resident was treated with respect and dignity in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of quality of life. This was identified for one (Resident #64) of 10 sampled residents. Specifically, Nurse Practitioner # 1 was observed on 10/17/2024 walking into Resident # 64's room without knocking on the resident's door. The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Privacy During Care, revised October 2022 documented that the resident/patient is entitled to privacy during care and all staff is to knock on a closed door and ask to enter before entering the resident/patient's room (unless the staff just left the room momentarily and is returning to complete care, etc.). Resident #64 was admitted with diagnoses that include Diabetes and Cellulitis (skin infection). The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE]…

  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 · D2024-10-22 · 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 observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 10/17/2024 and completed on 10/22/2024 the facility did not ensure that each resident had a Baseline Care Plan that included instructions to provide effective person-centered care that meets professional standards. This was identified for one (Resident #165) of one resident reviewed for skin conditions. Specifically, Resident #165 was assessed as at risk for falls and was placed on tele-sitter remote visual monitoring using a camera in the resident's room. The resident's care plan interventions did not include the tele-sitter remote visual monitoring. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Continuous Visual Monitoring Using Remote Tele-Sitter Technology or Virtual Safety Companion Technology, last revised 9/2022 documented that the initiation of continuous visual monitoring is a nursing intervention. It can be utilized to ensure patient safety as an additional tool in the plan of care for patients at high…

  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 · D2023-06-16 · 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 interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 6/14/2023 and completed on 6/16/2023 the facility did not ensure that a person-centered care plan for each resident was developed and implemented that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical and nursing needs. This was identified for one (Resident #117) of one resident reviewed for hydration. Specifically, on 6/14/2023 Resident #117 was administered Packed Red Blood Cells (PRBC). There was no documented evidence in the medical record of a Care Plan related to blood transfusion that included goals and interventions to monitor the resident during and after the blood transfusion. The finding is: Resident #117 was admitted with diagnoses that include Cancer, Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD), and End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD). A 5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated the resident was…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-16 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 6/14/2023 and completed on 6/16/2023, the facility did not ensure that resident records were complete and accurately documented in accordance with professional standards of practice. This was identified for one (Resident #69) of one resident reviewed for Skin Condition. Specifically, Resident #69 was admitted to the facility with a left dorsal (back) hand and forearm discoloration, however, there was no documented evidence of the identified left-hand and forearm discolorations in the medical record. The finding is: Resident #69 was admitted with diagnoses that included Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, and Heart Failure. A review of the Baseline care plan dated 6/10/2023 was conducted on 6/15/2023 at 4:30 PM. The Baseline care plan did not include documented evidence of the resident's left dorsal hand and forearm discoloration. The Skin-Body [NAME] Assessment form (form to indicate skin issues upon admission) dated 6/10/2023 did not include evidence of left dorsal hand 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• No harm found · C2025-12-24 · tag F0868 — widespread
  Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 12/22/2025 and completed on 12/24/2025, the facility did not ensure it maintained a quality assessment and assurance committee that included the Infection Preventionist (IP) as a member of the committee. Specifically, the Infection Preventionist did not participate and report on the Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) and on incidents (for example health care associated infections) regularly to the Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement committee meetings that were held from 03/31/2025 through 09/11/2025.The finding is:The facility's policy titled Quality Management/Performance Improvement dated 09/2025 documented that all staff participates in the performance improvement process. Quality improvement data/analysis and discussion will take place quarterly at team meetings. Targeted areas for improvement are identified and prioritized based on unit, departmental, regulatory and professional standards of practice and outcomes. Staff education/teaching is integral to performance…

  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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 25 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.

What families pay in NY