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

Waterview Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Center

537 Route 22, Purdy Station, NY 10578 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 130 certified beds · (914) 277-3691 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (914) 277-3691 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Jun 20251 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (25% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2025
  • 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
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits 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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 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 — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
380 Route 202 · (914) 277-5550 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
336 Route 202 · (914) 276-2121 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
8 Heritage Hls · (914) 277-5555 · Call to confirm hours
Park
15 Sunset Dr · (914) 669-5665 · 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 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 4 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 rating4★
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 increased10.5%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.2%5.8%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms47.2%19.5%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.7%3.1%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.5%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.3%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.9%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.9%6.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.5%19.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.6%13.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.7%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine69.9%78.8%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.9%20.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.8%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.491.701.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.951.361.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ 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.

63.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 305 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

63.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
62.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.59U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.24hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.31hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 62.9% 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 159 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 0.59 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 SNF63.2%CMS range 58.2–68.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.3%CMS range 7.5–13.410.7%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 discharge62.9%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 discharge55.4%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 discharge61.0%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 setting91.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge92.1%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 stay0.4%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 worsened1.5%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 hospitalization8.0%CMS range 5.6–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.411.02Oct 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

0.67
RN hours/ resident / day
0.53
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.02
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.22
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.63
RN hoursweekends
24.7%
Total nursing turnover
0.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 130 beds and averages 122.6 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.02 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 2.84 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.38 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-10-10)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2022-08-12)

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.

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2026-06-09 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors for one of four residents (Resident #94) reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, on 05/04/2025 at 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM, the facility failed to administer Levetiracetam (Keppra: medication used to help control seizures) 750 milligrams two tablets (1500 milligrams) every 12 hours to Resident #94 as per physician order. Subsequently, Resident #94 had a seizure on 05/05/2025 at approximately 12:20 AM and was transferred to the hospital. This resulted in actual harm to Resident #94 that was not Immediate Jeopardy. The findings include:The facility's policy Medication Administration revised 03/05/2024, documented medications should be administered in a safe and timely manner, as prescribed. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders, including any required time frame, and within one hour of their prescribed time unless otherwise specified (before and after meals). The facility's policy Reordering/Refill revised 03/12/2024…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-04 · 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 record review and interviews conducted during the Abbreviated Survey (NY00375616), the facility did not ensure that a resident's right was supported by the facility for 1 or 3 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #1 filed a grievance which was reported to the Director of Nursing in January 2025 that they prefer not to receive cares from Certified Nurse Aide #1 because they were too strong in their touch and at times manhandled them. On 3/18/2025, Certified Nurse Aide #1 provided care to Resident #1 and the resident reported to their family representative that Certified Nurse Aide #1 came to their room at approximately 4:45 am, woke them out of their sleep and provided cares to them after they refused the care. Resident #1 also alleged that they were manhandled by Certified Nurse Aide #1. There was no documented evidence that Resident #1's care plan was updated with their preference. The facility did not provide evidence that the Nurses and Certified Nurse Aides were made aware of Resident #1's preference. The findings are: The 7/1/2019 facility policy title Activities…

    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 · D2025-06-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Abbreviated Survey (NY00375616), the facility did not ensure for 1 (Residents #1) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse, had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Specifically, Resident #1 was awaken at 4:45am by Certified Nurse Aide #1 to provide personal hygiene care. Resident #1 refused cares but Certified Nurse Aide #1 continued to provide cares despite Resident #1's refusal. Resident #1 reported Certified Nurse Aide #1 mishandled them. Resident #1 was very upset because thier sleep was interrupted by Certified Nurse Aide #1 and reported to their family representative. The findings are: The 1/28/21 Facility policy titled Abuse Prevention/Prohibition documented that all Residents will be free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, corporal punishment, and involuntary seclusion. The 1/23/28 Facility policy titled Residents Rights documented that all residents have a right to a dignified existence and self-determination, has a right to make choices about aspects of…

    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 · D2025-06-04 · 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 conducted during the Abbreviated Survey (NY00375616), the facility did not ensure for 1(Residents #1) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse, that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source, were reported immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation is made, to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures. Specifically, 1.) On 3/18/25, the facility initiated an investigation of alleged abuse due to a report from Resident #1's family on 3/18/25 that Resident #1 called them early in the morning on 3/18/25 upset that two certified nurse aides came into their room at approximately 4:45 am while they were asleep and insisted on changing them despite their refusal and while providing cares, they were manhandled by the Certified Nurse Aides. Resident #1 was very upset by the actions of the Certified Nurse Aide #1 & #2. The findings are: The 1/28/21 Facility policy titled Abuse Prevention/Prohibition documented the Federal 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-10-10 · tag F0638 — pattern
    Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, conducted during the recertification survey from 10/3/24 to 10/10/24, the facility did not ensure the residents' Minimum Data Set assessments were completed not less frequently than once every 3 months. This was evident for 3 (Residents # 11,14, and 23) of 18 residents reviewed for Resident Assessment. Specifically, Minimum Data Set assessments for Resident #11, Resident #14, Resident #23, were not completed within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Minimum Data Set Completion, initiated 9/1/18 last reviewed 6/14/24 documented assessments will be completed no later than 92 days after the previous Assessment Reference Date. 1) Resident #11's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) with an Assessment Reference Date of 8/6/24 documented a completion date of 10/1/24, more than 14 days (8 weeks) after the Assessment Reference Date. 2) Resident #14's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) with an Assessment Reference Date of 8/21/24 documented a completion date of 10/1/24, more…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-10 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure 1 of 3 residents (Resident #16) reviewed for positioning and range of motion, had the necessary treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion. Specifically, Resident #16 was observed poorly positioned and their plan of care did not include interventions to address body, head, and neck positioning. Findings include: Resident #16 was admitted to facility with diagnoses including Diabetes, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, and osteoarthritis of the right shoulder. The 10/1/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) an assessment tool documented Resident #16 had moderately impaired cognition, received regularly scheduled pain medication, and was not receiving rehab services. The Minimum Data Set documented Resident #16 required set up or clean up assist for eating. The Activities of Daily Living Care Plan created 10/16/15 documented Resident #16 required set up and supervision for feeding. The 6/11/24 Occupational Therapy evaluation…

    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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    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 from 10/3/24 to 10/10/24, the facility did not ensure that each resident received necessary respiratory care including oxygen therapy that was in accordance with professional standards of practice and as ordered by the practitioner for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #312) reviewed for respiratory care. Specifically, Resident #312 had an order for oxygen therapy but there was no documented evidence of monitoring to ensure it was being administered, and there was no evidence the nasal canula tubing was changed per policy. Findings include: The facility policy and procedure titled Oxygen Administration with effective date 3/30/10, last reviewed on 7/8/24, documented the following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: the rate of oxygen flow, route, and rationale, the frequency and duration of the treatment, the date and time that the procedure was performed, the name and title of the individual who performed…

    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 · Dcited before2024-10-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    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 observations and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 10/3/24 to 10/10/24, the facility did not ensure food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food safety practice. Specifically, there was undated and without expiration dates food stored in the walk-in freezer and refrigerator. Finding include: The facility policy Food Inventory Receiving and Storage effective 09/09/2018 and reviewed 2/14/2024, documented each item must be dated and labeled. Any items opened/used and returned to storage shall be wrapped, labeled, and dated from initial date of use. During an initial tour of the kitchen on 10/03/24 at 9:08 AM, conducted with Food Service Director, the following were observed in the walk-in freezer: 1. A bag of frozen pork butt, without original box, with receiving date 9/26/24, no expiration date. 2. Open bags of hash brown patties, and French fries, both bags were undated. Observation of walk-in refrigerator on 10/03/24 at 9:21 AM revealed opened and undated packs of American cheese, liverwurst, Raskas Cream Cheese and a bag of…

    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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview conducted during a recertification survey 10/3/24- 10/10/24, the facility did not properly establish and/or maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment. Specifically, the facility had not updated the Water Management Plan since 12/16/19. The findings are: During a review of the Legionella Assessment and Water Management Plan on 10/7/24 at 11:50 AM with the Director of Engineering, the facility's Water Management Plan was dated 12/16/19. The facility Administrator and Director of Nursing's names were handwritten on the form over white out from the former Administrator and Director of Nursing. During an interview on 10/7/24 at 11:50 AM, the Director of Engineering stated they were responsible for updating the plan annually but had not done it in the last year. The Director of Engineering stated it was important to have updated information and a current Management team. The plan was to have an outside company come in to do an assessment and formulate a Management Plan, which was scheduled…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-05-01 · 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, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that foods were stored in accordance with professional standards for food safety practice. Specifically, for 2 of 4 nourishment refrigerators (Armonk and Canterbury units): (1) freezer thermometer readings did not reflect acceptable temperatures and no corrective action had been taken, and (2) foods stored in freezer compartments were not frozen solid. The facility's freezers must be in good working condition and must keep frozen foods frozen solid. The finding is: An Engineering policy and procedure for Temperature Logs dated October 2018 revealed the Engineering Mechanic fills out logs for refrigerators and freezers on a daily basis; freezer temperatures should be between -10 and 0 degrees F and notifies Engineering Director of any temperatures that do not fall in the proper ranges. An inspection of all nourishment refrigerators in the facility conducted on 5/1/19 between 12:00 PM and 12:30 PM with the Food Service Director (FSD) present revealed: (1)…

    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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that a comprehensive person-centered care plan with measurable goals and interventions was developed to address the resident's diabetic needs. Specifically, 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 83) did not have a care plan in place to address his diabetic needs. The findings are: Resident # 83 had diagnoses and conditions including Major Depression and Diabetes. In an interview with the resident on 4/24/2019 at 1:54 PM he stated that his blood sugar levels had not been managed properly. He stated that the levels were usually in the 300's. According to the 3/22/2019 minimum data set (MDS- a resident assessment tool) the resident had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 14/15, which indicated intact cognition, dependent on insulin for Diabetes, and required extensive assistance with his activities of daily living (ADLs). The 4/8/19 physician orders had instructions for Lantus insulin 5 units subcutaneous at bedtime and Humalog Insulin sliding scale before…

    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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0685 — isolated
    Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents received proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain hearing ability. This was evident for 1 resident reviewed for vision and hearing. ( Resident #55). The finding is: Resident #55 was admitted with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus and Depression. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a resident assessment tool) dated 03/01/2019 documented that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 out of a possible 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further documented that the resident had minimal hearing difficulty with no hearing aid. Review of the Annual MDS dated [DATE] documented that the resident had minimal hearing difficulty and used a hearing aid. Review of the admission Nursing Evaluations dated 10/17/2018 and 02/25/2019 documented that the resident had adequate hearing to both ears and does 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.

    Quality of Life and Care 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 EPIC HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT — 5 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 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.6+0.4 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, 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
JOZEFOVIC, HERBERTIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF70%since 10/01/2025
NEUMAN, MARKIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF20%since 10/01/2025
SINGER, BARUCHIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF10%since 10/01/2025
BONILLA, MADELYNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
BOULAY, MARIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2025
FEMINELLA, DANIELLEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
HALPERN, JOSHUAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/13/2026
JOZEFOVIC, YOSEFIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 10/01/2025
KREISMANN, ARIIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MANISCALCO, VINCENTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MASTERSON, EILEENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MCPEEK, KATEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MOZDIERZ, SANDYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
PANDYA, DHIMANTKUMARIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/13/2026
EPIC HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
FCA PARTNERS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
HMM & CO., LLPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
LONG TERM SOLUTIONS, INC.OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MED-NET COMPLIANCE LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MEDFIRST INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MOKRAY ACQUISITION I LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 40 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

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.

$21.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-0.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.6M
Related-party expense7% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 59%Medicare 28%Other / private 13%

This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$509per resident / day
operating cost
$15,486per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$506per 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 335259. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-10, 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