John T Mather Memorial Hosp T C U
75 North Country Road, Port Jefferson, NY 11777 · For profit - Individual · 16 certified beds · (631) 473-1320 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (3% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 held steady at 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.6% | 78.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.0% | 20.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.0% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
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.
80.5% 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 533 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.6% 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 292 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 2.03 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 97% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 80.5%CMS range 77.0–83.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.9%CMS range 9.5–14.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 61.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 48.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 66.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 99.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge | 99.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 3.8%CMS range 2.0–5.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.69 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 16 beds and averages 13.7 residents a day — about 86% 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 7.99 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 4.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.19 is at or above 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 7.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 8.33 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 5.20 to 3.80 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 3% is below 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey initiated on 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025, the facility did not follow proper sanitation practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness and did not store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was identified during the Kitchen Task. Specifically, during the kitchen observation on 5/21/2025: 1) Multiple undated, unlabeled, uncovered cooked food, and expired food items were observed in the walk-in refrigerators, walk-in freezer, and dry storage room. 2) Multiple dietary staff did not perform proper hygienic practices including hand washing and hair covering while handling food. 3) There was an unsanitary soiled reach-in refrigerator and a soiled meat slicer. The washed wet cooking pans were nesting on top of each other. 4) Catch buckets with dirty kitchen towels and aprons were placed in the dry storage room adjacent to the stored food items. This is a repeat deficiency. The findings included but were not limited to: 1) 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0635 — isolatedProvide doctor's orders for the resident's immediate care at the time the resident was 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 observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident had physician orders for the resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted to the facility. This was identified for two (#158 and Resident #151) of two residents reviewed for Limited Range of Motion. Specifically, 1) Resident #158 utilized a lumbar spine orthosis without a Physician's order, and 2) Resident #151 had a diagnosis of left distal radial (arm bone near the wrist) fracture and was wearing a sugar tong splint (a type of splint that stabilizes injuries of the forearm and wrist by preventing forearm rotation and wrist motion) and sling on the left arm. There was no Physician's Order for using the sugar tong splint and sling until 5/22/2025. The findings are: 1) Resident #158 was re-admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Diabetes Mellitus, stroke management, and Back Pain. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate 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 observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025 the facility did not ensure it developed and implemented a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care. This was identified for one (Resident #158) of two residents reviewed for Limited Range of Motion. Specifically, Resident #158 used a lumbar spinal orthotic device due to a lumbar vertebra (spine) fracture; however, the device was not included in the baseline care plan and there was no physician's order for the device. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Interdisciplinary Care Plan, dated 3/2025, documented all residents requiring a stay in the facility will have an Interdisciplinary Plan of Care upon admission. The purpose is to develop a plan of care, treatment, and services individualized and appropriate to the 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025, the facility did not ensure that each resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was identified for one (Resident #154) of one resident reviewed for Respiratory Care. Specifically, during observation, an unlabeled nebulizer mask was not covered and was hung on the wall-mounted oxygen flowmeter with the oxygen tubing still connected to the nebulizer mask in Resident #154's room. The finding is: The facility's policy and procedure titled Equipment Processing and Circuit Change Intervals last revised in July 2021 documented that each resident's nebulizer setup will be discarded and replaced every seven days by Respiratory Therapists. The date of the equipment change and the therapist's initials will be written on the plastic treatment bag. After each treatment, nebulizers will be emptied and put back into the labeled plastic bag…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025 the facility did not ensure it established and maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This was identified for one (Resident #158) of six residents observed during the medication pass. Specifically, during the medication administration observation for Resident #158, Registered Nurse #2 brought the medication cart into the resident's room for medication administration. Registered Nurse #2 then dropped an individual blister-packed medication (one pill in an individual blister pack) onto the floor. While wearing gloves, the nurse picked up the blister-packed medication and popped the tablet out of the blister pack into a souffle cup already containing other medication tablets. The nurse then discarded the medications that were in the souffle cup. The nurse did not…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0882 — isolatedDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025, the facility did not ensure that it designated one or more individual(s) as the Infection Preventionist(s) (IP)(s) who are responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention Control Program (IPCP) and the Infection Preventionist must have completed specialized training in infection prevention and control beyond initial professional training or education prior to assuming the role. Specifically, the facility's designated Infection Preventionist did not have documented evidence of specialized training in infection prevention and control beyond the initial professional training or education prior to assuming the role. Finding is: The facility's policy for Infection Prevention and Control did not include qualifications/training requirements beyond the initial professional training or education for the facility's Infection Control Officer/Preventionist. A review of the Director of Infection Prevention (the designated Infection Preventionist) personnel 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during a Recertification Survey initiated on 6/17/2024 and completed on 6/20/2024, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was identified during the Kitchen observation conducted on 6/17/2024. Specifically, the walk-in refrigerator for produce and dairy was observed holding a rack of eight trays of cooked chicken breast and three pans of gravy sauce. The trays of cooked chicken breast were uncovered and undated and the gravy sauce was unlabeled and undated. A rack containing uncooked and undated bacon strips was observed. The bacon strips were taken out of their original package and prepped onto 15 baking sheets. The walk-in refrigerator for meat was observed with two racks containing trays of various uncovered food items including but not limited to pizza, pasta, and chickpeas. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Nutrition and Food Services Guidelines last reviewed on 3/18/2021 documented that…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-20 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave 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 record review and interviews conducted during a Recertification Survey initiated on 6/17/2024 and completed on 6/20/2024, the facility did not ensure that their policy regarding the use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors included to ensure facility staff assists the resident in accessing and consuming the food if the resident is not able to do so on their own. Specifically, the facility policy did not include guidance to facility staff regarding assisting the resident in accessing, handling (reheating), and consuming the food brought in from outside by the family members and other visitors if the resident is not able to do so on their own. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Nutrition and Food Services Guidelines last reviewed on 3/18/2021 documented that patients who desire to have food brought in from outside should be permitted to do so. Food should be labeled with the patient's name and date when placed in the pantry refrigerator and discarded after 72 hours. The policy did not specify how the facility staff would assist 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 staff interviews during the Recertification Survey, initiated on 6/17/2024 and completed on 6/20/2024, the facility did not ensure it maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #58) of seven resident observed during the medication administration. Specifically, Resident #58 had a physician's order for a tuberculin skin test (a screening diagnostic test for Tuberculosis). When Registered Nurse #1 offered the test to the resident on 6/18/2024, the resident refused. There was no documented evidence that Registered Nurse #1 reported the refusal to the Physician. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Tuberculosis Control Strategy Plan, dated 2/20/2024, documented it is the policy of the facility to minimize patient and healthcare personnel risk for exposure to pathogens that can cause disease and/or infection. The intent of this policy is to identify patients with Tuberculosis, describe measures to prevent…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-10-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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, record review, and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 10/3/2022 and completed on 10/5/2022, the facility did not ensure proper sanitation practices were maintained in the main kitchen area to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness. Specifically, during the initial tour of the main Hospital kitchen, the light fixtures near the kitchen exhaust fan were observed with a buildup of grease and dirt. The finding is: During the initial tour of the main Hospital kitchen area on 10/03/2022 at 11:39 AM, three light fixtures were observed with a buildup of grease and dirt near the kitchen exhaust fan. The Food Service Director (FSD) was interviewed on 10/3/2022 at 11:40 AM and stated the fixtures should not have a build-up of grease and dust and will be cleaned promptly. The FSD stated that the exhaust liner is cleaned every 2 months. The liner was last cleaned in August 2022 and the service company should have cleaned the light fixtures at that time. The Administrator was interviewed on 10/6/2022 at 12:15 PM and stated that the kitchen is…
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.
- No harm found · C2025-05-23 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave 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 5/21/2025 and completed on 5/23/2025, the facility did not ensure that the Infection Preventionist was a member of the facility's Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement (QAPI) and Quality Assessment & Assurance (QAA) committee and reported to the committee on the Infection Prevention and Control Program regularly. Specifically, the Infection Preventionist did not participate in the Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement meetings held from 8/5/2024 through 4/21/2025. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Quality Management and Patient Safety, dated 1/1/2025, documented that the facility will report outcomes quarterly in the Interdisciplinary Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. This may include, but is not limited to, systems and reports, demonstrating systematic identification, reporting, investigation, analysis, and prevention of adverse events; and documentation demonstrating the development, implementation, and evaluation of corrective actions or…
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.
- No harm found · C2022-10-05 · tag F0623 — widespreadProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 10/3/2022 and completed on 10/5/2022, the facility did not ensure that a copy of the notice of transfer or discharge was sent to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. This was identified for one (Resident #5) of one residents reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, Resident #5 was transferred to the hospital on 8/22/2022. The facility did not notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman office of Resident #5's facility-initiated transfer and discharge to the hospital. The finding is: The facility policy dated 7/11/2022, titled Patient Discharge, did not include guidance related to notifying the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman in writing when the facility initiates a resident transfer or discharge. Resident #5 was admitted with diagnoses that included Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer with spread to the Lung, Liver Adrenals, and Bone, and Chronic Back Pain. The Minimum Data Set (MDS)…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NORTHWELL HEALTHCARE INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/01/2018 |
| DONNELLY, SHARON | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/12/2016 |
| IADANZA, CHRISTINA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/12/2016 |
| LIVRERI, CHRISTINE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/12/2016 |
| MADER, WILLIAM | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 08/01/2023 |
| NG, JOSEPH | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 08/01/2023 |
| ROBERTS, KENNETH | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/1986 |
| WISNOSKI, JOSEPH | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2009 |
| BELLO, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| BLUMENCRANZ, ROGER | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/01/2018 |
| BRITTON, BETSY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/1979 |
| COLSON, MARVIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| CRAIG, NICHOLAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2017 |
| DANOWSKI, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2004 |
| DIAZ, SYLVIA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| DIVINEY, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| ENGELHARDT, DEBRA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/01/2015 |
| FREY, KATHRYN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/01/2005 |
| GLYNN, TIMOTHY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/01/2011 |
| KUHN, KONRAD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/1978 |
| LIPPENCOTT, DONALD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| NAPPI, RALPH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| RUGGIERO, CHRISTINE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| SINI, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/1982 |
| STERNLICHT, LEO | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2004 |
| TRANCHON, HAROLD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/1979 |
| WEISS, EDWARD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/01/1988 |
| YU, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| CUSACK, MICHELE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 66 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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
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.
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 335853. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-23, 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.