No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Pine Haven Home

Ny Route 217, Philmont, NY 12565 · For profit - Corporation · 128 certified beds · (518) 672-4021 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (518) 672-4021 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Apr 2025Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
23 Fish and Game Rd · (518) 828-7644 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
460 Fairview Ave · (518) 822-0165 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.6%14.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.4%5.8%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.5%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms6.3%19.5%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.4%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened9.5%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.0%13.2%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.1%6.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.8%19.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table22.1%13.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%78.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission20.9%20.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.0%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.171.701.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.201.361.80better

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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

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

37.7% 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 112 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

37.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
52.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.35U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.17hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 52.4% 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 63 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 59% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF37.7%CMS range 30.8–46.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.2%CMS range 8.3–16.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge52.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge39.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge54.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge95.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.1%CMS range 3.7–10.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.351.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.59
RN hours/ resident / day
0.80
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.18
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.57
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.45
RN hoursweekends
43.2%
Total nursing turnover
35.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 128 beds and averages 117.4 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 11 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 2.57 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.18 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 2.15 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.74 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.65 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 43% 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-01)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2022-03-30)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2025-04-01 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview conducted during the recertification and abbreviated survey (Case #s NY00309923 and NY00359733), the facility did not ensure provision of sufficient nursing staff to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident throughout the facility. Specifically, between 3/23/2025 and 3/31/2025, the minimum hours of nursing care per resident day was less than the established minimum set by the Centers for Medicaid/Medicare Services. This is evidenced by: The Facility assessment dated [DATE], documented under Staffing plan, that the facility worked diligently to maintain staffing levels for all departments that met Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Guidelines for providing optimal resident centered care. Facility Nursing Levels based on an Average Daily Census of 110 (in past 30 days) equaled 3.07 Hours Per Patient Day. Licensed Nursing equaled 1.43 Hours Per Patient Day. Certified Nurse Aides…

    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 before2025-04-01 · 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

    Based on observation and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, (a) a container of tomato juice was found unlabeled in the refrigerator; and (b) a container of opened, unlabeled cranberry juice was found in the dry storage area. This is evidenced by: During the initial tour of the kitchen between 11:00 AM and 12:00 PM on 3/24/2025, the following was observed: (a) A pitcher with red liquid, unlabeled in the dessert refrigerator. At the time of observation, Kitchen Director #1 identified the red liquid to be tomato juice, stated there should have been a label on it stating it was opened today. Kitchen Director #1 then removed the pitcher and stated that they would refresh the supplies correctly. (b) An opened, unlabeled bottle of Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice in the dry storage area. At the time of observation, Regional Food Director #1 stated that a new employee that started a week prior had walked out an hour before the survey team arrived at 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-01 · 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 record review and interviews during a recertification and abbreviated survey (Case #NY00309923), the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were reported immediately, or no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made for one (1) (Resident #115) of eight (8) residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, an allegation of verbal abuse reported by a resident to a Certified Nurse Aide on 2/05/2023 was not reported to Administration until 2/06/2023, and not reported to The New York State Department of Health until 2/08/2023. This is evidenced by: Facility policy titled, Abuse Policy-Prevention and Management, reviewed August 2024, documented the Facility has designed and implemented processes, which strive to ensure the prevention and reporting of suspected or alleged resident/patient abuse. Under the heading Identification the policy documents instruct staff, resident/patient, family, visitor, to report immediately, without fear of reprisal, any knowledge or suspicion of suspected abuse. Under the heading Reporting the policy documents staff would…

    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 before2025-04-01 · 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 record review and interview conducted during a recertification and abbreviated survey (Case #NY00356721), the facility did not ensure the environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for one (1) (Resident #41) of seven (7) residents reviewed for accident hazards. Specifically, for Resident #41 the temperature of the resident's microwave reheated beverage was not checked prior to serving, resulting in a first degree burn to the resident's chest. This is evidenced by: The facility Policy and Procedure titled Food - Microwave Reheating, last revised 7/26/2024, documented the staff were to use the thermometer to ensure a maximum temperature of the reheated food or beverage was not greater than 140 degrees Fahrenheit prior to serving. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of anxiety, chronic pain and peripheral venous insufficiency (veins have trouble sending blood from limbs back to the heart). The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented the resident could understand, be…

    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 · E2022-03-30 · tag F0813 — pattern
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and staff interview during the recertification survey on 03/23/2022 through 03/30/2022 the facility did not ensure foods brought to residents by family and other visitors was in accordance with adopted regulations. Specifically, food brought to residents was not labeled and discarded per the facility policy. This is evidenced as follows: The policy titled Food from Home - Safety dated 09/2021, documented food brought in from the outside will be labeled by staff with the resident name and dated with the current date the item(s) was brought to the facility and will be discarded after 72 hours. The policy documented unlabeled/undated food found will be discarded immediately. During observations on 3/24/22 at 9:45 AM, store-bought cold cuts and a frozen entree were found in the North Unit Nourishment Station refrigerator. Both the bologna and baked ham cold cuts were not labeled with the resident room number, or the date received. The bologna had sell-by date printed on the package of 2/17/22, and the bologna was moldy. The surveyor witnessed 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-03-30 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review during a recertification survey on 03/23/2022 through 03/30/2022 the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 2 (Resident #s 22 and 59) of 8 residents reviewed for accidents. Specifically, for Resident #22 and #59, the facility did not ensure the residents' nursing assessments documented the residents were able to self-administer medications, had a care plan or a physician order to self-administer medications that were left at bedside by nursing staff. This was evidenced by: The Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Medication Administration dated 1/2022 documented residents may self-administer their own medications if the Attending Physician, in conjunction with the Interdisciplinary Care Planning Team, has determined that they have the decision-making capacity to do so safely. Resident #22: Resident #22 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of gastro-esophageal reflux disease, atherosclerotic heart disease, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an…

    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 · D2022-03-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review during a recertification survey on 03/23/2022 through 03/30/2022, the facility did not ensure it provided separately locked, permanently affixed compartments for storage of controlled drugs listed in Schedule II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1976 and other drugs subject to abuse, except when the facility used single unit package drug distribution systems in which the quantity stored was minimal and a missing dose could be readily detected for 1 (South Unit) of 2 units reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure the #2 narcotic cabinet for the South Unit had two functioning locked doors. This was evidenced by: During an observation on 03/30/2022 at 9:38 AM, the #2 double door narcotic cabinet on South Unit, did not have a functioning lock on the inner door. The inner door had a strip of greying white tape affixed to the bottom of the door with a small portion extended from the bottom of the door which was used to pull the door open. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 was observed unlocking 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-10-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    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 during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure comprehensive care plans (CCP) were developed and implemented for each resident that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing and mental and psychosocial needs for 8 (Resident #'s 3, 14, 17, 29, 31, 46, 48, and 54) of 23 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Specifically, for Resident #3, the facility did not ensure that the CCP for Feeding Tube did not include an incorrect physician order for the tube feeding; for Resident #14, the facility did not ensure the comprehensive care plans for depression and anxiety included person centered non-pharmacological interventions; for Resident #17, the comprehensive care plan for Activities of Daily Living that documented the resident ambulated (walked) with extensive assist of one was implemented; for Resident #31, the CCP for Pain did not include the etiology of the pain; for Resident #46, the CCP for mood…

    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 · Ecited before2019-10-22 · 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

    Based on observation and staff interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute or serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Food preparation and serving area floors and equipment are to be kept clean, and kitchen equipment is to be kept in good repair. Specifically, equipment in the main kitchen and unit nourishment Stations were not clean and/or not in good repair; and the facility did not ensure proper food handling practices for residents in the Haven dining room. This is evidenced as follows. Finding #1: The main kitchen and the nourishment stations were inspected on 10/16/2019 at 08:51 AM. Drawers, mixer, slicer, microwave ovens, and stove were soiled with food particles. The floors next to walls and under equipment were soiled. The food preparation sink in the main kitchen had an open hole where the overflow drain and pipe should be connected, and open holes were found in the upper lip next to the faucets in the Nourishment Stations on the west and north units. The Food Service Director stated 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-22 · 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

    Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect and cared for in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life in the Haven dining room for 4 (Resident #'s 24, 29, 30, and 46) of 5 residents reviewed for dignity, and did not ensure residents were transported in a dignified manner for 1 (Resident #81) of 5 residents reviewed for dignity. Specifically, the facility did not ensure residents' were provided dignity during dining, when staff were observed standing and feeding multiple residents at the same time, that food under a residents mouth was not caught by bare hands rather than using a clothes protector, that a resident was not transported in a wheelchair in a rear-facing position down 2 hallways, and did not attend to a resident who was yelling out and crying in a timely manner. This is evidenced by: Finding #1: The facility did not ensure residents' were provided dignity during dining, when staff were…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure each resident received treatment and care in accordance with standards of practice for 1 (Resident #81) of 4 residents reviewed for positioning. Specifically, the facility did not ensure a resident received the needed care or services for positioning resulting in one or more residents' failure to attain their highest practicable physical well-being, and did not ensure the resident's response to a positioning intervention was monitored and evaluated in a timely manner. This is evidenced by: Resident #81: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of anxiety disorder, dementia, and bipolar disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 9/25/19, documented the resident had severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making, could sometimes understand others and could sometimes make self understood. A Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Positioning of 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-22 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    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 record review, and interviews during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure that residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions (GDR's), and behavioral interventions, in an effort to discontinue these drugs and did not ensure as needed (PRN) orders for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner believed it was appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, he or she should document their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order for 3 (Resident #'s 14, 46, and #48) of 5 residents reviewed for psychotropic medications. Specifically, for Resident #14, the facility did not ensure the attending physician or prescribing practitioner was presented with the need to attempt a GDR in the absence of identified and documented clinical contraindications for a resident on Remeron (a psychotropic medication); for Resident #46, the facility did not ensure 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-22 · 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 observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each resident received, and the facility provided food that accommodated resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, for one (Resident #63) of one resident reviewed for dietary preferences. Specifically, for Resident #63, the facility did not ensure the resident was provided with his preference of Activia yogurt when available. This is evidenced by: Resident #63: The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of cerebral infarction, hypertension, and depressive episodes. The Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated 9/9/19, documented the resident had severely impaired cognition, could understand others and could make self understood. The Policy and Procedure titled Flexible Dining Program Policy dated 12/1/2017, documented tray cards are used to communicate care plan interventions to the resident and staff for use in making mealtime selections. Resident's…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to JONATHAN BLEIER — 18 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.4+2.6 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.2+1.8 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 53.2-1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
The other 17 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BLEIER, JONATHANIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST48%since 04/20/2015
PECKMAN, BRUCEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 04/20/2015
SOD, YAAKOVIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST48%since 04/20/2015
HERSKOWITZ, DAVIDIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/01/2016
MALIANGOS, NICOLETIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2015

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.

$14.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.7M
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 66%Medicare 10%Other / private 24%

This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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

$383per resident / day
operating cost
$11,633per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$378per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in New York
$15,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,110/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335632. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-01, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next