The Friendly Home

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

38.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 100 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 52.5% 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 40 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 200 beds and averages 169.1 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 31 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.34 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 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 3.75 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.58 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-12-19 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — pattern
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  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 12/11/2025 to 12/19/2025, it was determined that for one (Resident #61) of five residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure that PRN (as needed) orders for anti-psychotic drugs (medications used to treat symptoms of psychosis) were limited to 14 days. Specifically, there were several instances in which Resident #61 had as needed (PRN) Haldol (an antipsychotic medication) orders that exceeded the 14 day timeframe. Additionally, over several months, Pharmacist #1 identified through monthly Medication Regimen Reviews the Haldol orders and recommended they be reordered every 14 days. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #61 had diagnoses including dementia, depression, and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) dated 10/13/2025 revealed Resident #61 was severely impaired cognitively, was on hospice (specialized medical care for people nearing end of life), and received antipsychotic medications. The current Comprehensive Care Plan revealed Resident #61 was nearing end…

  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 · E2025-12-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a recertification survey from 12/11/2025 to 12/19/2025, for two (2) (Resident #33 and #140) of three (3) residents reviewed for respiratory care, and two (2) (Resident #6 and #88) of five (5) residents reviewed for drugs and medications, the facility did not provide services to meet professional standards of quality. Specifically, Resident #6 had physician's orders for blood pressure to be obtained prior to receiving blood pressure medication, and the facility could not provide documentation the blood pressure was consistently obtained prior to the administration of the medication per the medical order. Resident #33 and Resident #140 had reportable instances of high blood glucose, and the facility could not provide documentation a medical provider was notified per the medical order. Resident #88 had physician's orders for measuring blood glucose levels and obtaining blood pressure and pulse before administering blood pressure medication, and…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during recertification and complaint (#2619460) surveys from 12/11/2025 to 12/19/2025, for three (3) (Resident's #85, #125, and #126) of ten (10) residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure the resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, Resident #85 was observed over several days to have unopened wine bottles unsecured at their bedside, Resident #85 was not care planned for personal alcohol possession or consumption and there were other residents with wandering tendencies residing on that unit. In addition, Resident #125 had a right-sided transfer bar attached to their bed and a gap of approximately four (4) inches was observed between the transfer bar and mattress, concerning of a potential area of entrapment (where an individual can be caught between components of a bed). The facility could not provide…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interviews, for one (1) of one (1) resident reviewed (Resident #138), the facility failed to ensure the resident was treated with respect and dignity and cared for in a manner and environment that promotes the maintenance or enhancement of the resident's quality of life. Specifically, staff entered the resident's room without knocking or announcing their presence, failed to communicate with the resident during care interactions, and moved the resident's personal items without discussing the action with the resident.The findings include:The facility policy Resident Rights/Facility Responsibilities revised 05/30/2024 included, but was not limited to, the facility will treat each resident with respect and dignity, recognize each resident's individuality, and protect and promote the rights of the resident, including the right to participate in his or her treatment. Resident #138 had diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, right femur fracture, and dysarthria (a motor speech disorder making it difficult to speak clearly) following a stroke. The Minimum Data…

  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 · D2025-12-19 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, review conducted during recertification and complaint (#2691821) surveys from 12/11/2025 to 12/19/2025, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for three (3) of six (6) residents reviewed (Residents #33, #88, #154). Specifically, Resident #33 received insulin outside of administration parameters included in the medical order. Resident #88 received insulin outside of administration parameters included in the medical order and received insulin without documented evidence a blood glucose measurement was obtained prior to administration. Resident #154 did not receive medications and treatments in accordance with physician orders for multiple days after returning to the facility following a hospitalization. The findings include:The facility policy Medication Administration, Documentation, and Premedication revised August 2024 included, but was not limited to, licensed nursing staff were to check for hold parameters for…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored securely and accessible only to authorized personnel, in accordance with professional standards of practice and State and Federal regulations, for two (2) of four (4) residential units reviewed ([NAME] Place and [NAME] Place). Specifically, multiple loose pills (unsecured medications that were not contained in labeled packaging) were observed in medication carts, and a medication cart was observed unlocked and unattended.The findings include:Review of facility policy Medication Storage revised [DATE] included, but was not limited to, all medications stored and used within the facility shall be properly labeled and securely stored. Licensed nursing staff ensure expired, discontinued, or contaminated medications are removed promptly and disposed of according to facility policy and applicable regulations. Review of facility policy Medication Administration, Documentation, and Premedication revised [DATE]…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 12/11/2025 through 12/19/2025, the facility did not ensure they established and maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for three (3) (Residents #11, #69, and #184) of six (6) residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #11 had catheter care performed, the new drainage bag was observed on the floor uncovered and a nurse stepped on it. Resident #69 was on transmission based precautions (an infection control strategy used to control the spread of air-borne infections) and staff were observed going into the resident's room without wearing personal protective equipment (such as mask, gown, and gloves, worn to protect individuals and staff and reduce the risks of exposure to and spread of infections). Resident #184 was on enhanced barrier…

  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 · E2023-12-26 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that for four (Employees #1, #3, #4, and #5) of five newly hired employees the facility did not implement written policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property related to screening prospective employees. Specifically, the results of a nurse aide registry abuse screening were not documented for newly hired employees prior to starting work. The findings are: A review of facility policy, Administrative Policy #20A Abuse Prohibition, last reviewed November 22, 2022, included that it is the responsibility of Human Resources to screen all potential employees for a history of abuse, neglect or mistreatment of residents. On 12/20/23 from 9:03 AM to 9:47 AM, newly hired employee files were provided to the surveyor for review and included the following: 1) Employee #1 was hired on 10/2/23 as a Dining Services Associate and the results for a nurse aide registry screen for prior abuse findings were dated 10/19/23. 2) Employee #3 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  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 interviews conducted during a Recertification Survey, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections and an antibiotic stewardship program (processes to ensure that individuals are receiving appropriate antibiotics, at the correct dose, and for the proper length of time) that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. Specifically, the facility could not provide evidence of on-going surveillance and tracking of infections since June 2023 and there was no evidence that the facility had been maintaining an antibiotic stewardship program. This is evidenced by the following: The Facility Assessment, dated October 2023, documented that the facility's infection prevention and control program included surveillance and tracking of infections to monitor for trends and clusters, investigate contributing factors, provide staff education, and monitoring…

  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 · D2023-12-26 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that for one (Resident #53) of six residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living, the facility did not ensure that a resident with limited range of motion received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent further decline. Specifically, Resident #53 had contractures (deformities that result when muscles, joints, tendons, or other tissues tighten or shorten) to both hands and was not provided the hand devices (hand rolls) per their plan of care to prevent a decline. Additionally, the facility could not provide documented evidence that Resident #53 received range of motion per their plan of care. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #53 had diagnoses including central nervous system lymphoma (malignant cancer cells that affect the brain and/or spinal cord), brain tumor (swelling caused by an abnormal growth of tissue), and encephalopathy (a disease that affects brain function).…

  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.

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

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

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