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

The Hurlbut

1177 East Henrietta Road, Rochester, NY 14623 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 160 certified beds · (585) 424-4770 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (585) 424-4770 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Feb 2024
Insights

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

In its favor
  • 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
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)

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

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

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
945 E Henrietta Rd · (585) 292-6440 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
140 Metro Park · (585) 424-3784 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
900 Jefferson Rd · (585) 272-7020 · Call to confirm hours
Park
220 Metro Park · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1095 E Henrietta Rd · (585) 340-7322

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 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 rating3★
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 increased13.6%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight10.0%5.8%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.6%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.8%1.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.5%19.5%6.5%better 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 injury1.8%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.9%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication4.2%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.8%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.1%19.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table7.1%13.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.4%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine59.4%78.8%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission14.9%20.6%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit4.6%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.621.701.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.771.361.80better

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.

0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 66% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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

0.22
RN hours/ resident / day
1.33
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.79
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.34
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.17
RN hoursweekends
51.2%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 160 beds and averages 124.1 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 36 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.22 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 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 2.67 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.61 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.24 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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 (2025-07-31)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-02-16)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Potential for harm · E2025-07-31 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — pattern
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 the Recertification Survey from 07/24/2025 to 07/31/2025, the facility did not ensure each resident with pressure ulcers (ulcers on the skin due to prolonged pressure) received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing and prevent infection for two (2) (Residents #43 and #95) of three (3) residents reviewed. Specifically, for Resident #43, staff did not follow physician's orders when completing a pressure ulcer treatment. For Resident #95, there was a lack of consistent weekly pressure ulcer assessments (including staging, measurements, or a description of the wound) and ongoing monitoring of a left medial ankle pressure ulcer. Additionally, assessments completed for Resident #95 had conflicting documentation to include treatment instructions and location of the pressure ulcer. The findings are:The facility policy Medication Orders, dated September 2011, documented each resident must…

    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 · E2025-07-31 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 interviews and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey from 07/24/2025 to 07/31/2025, the facility did not ensure pharmacist reported irregularities were reviewed by the attending physician and acted upon timely for two (2) (Residents #69 and #77) of five (5) residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility could not provide documentation supporting the consultant pharmacist's monthly recommendations were acted upon by the facility's Medical Director, attending physicians, or designees. For Resident #77 the facility could not provide evidence the Director of Nursing or an attending physician had reviewed the consultant pharmacist's recommendations for ten (10) of twelve (12) months reviewed, and for nine (9) of twelve (12) months reviewed for Resident #66. The findings are: The facility policy Pharmacy Services, dated November 2017, included the pharmacist would conduct a monthly drug regimen review for each resident in the facility. The pharmacist would report any irregularities (drugs…

    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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey from 07/24/2025 to 07/31/2025, for one (1) (Resident #52) of two (2) residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure a resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible. Specifically, there were multiple observations of a bottle of pills labeled as zinc (a supplement that helps the immune system and metabolic function) left at Resident #52's bedside and there were no medical orders in place for the medication or to self-administer (the practice of an individual taking their own prescribed or over-the-counter medications independently, without direct assistance or supervision) the medication. Additionally, there was no documented evidence the resident had been reviewed by the interdisciplinary team for their ability to safely self-administer the medication or a comprehensive care plan in place to include measurable goals and interventions, for self-administration. The findings are:Review of the facility policy Self-Administration of Medications, dated 10/20/2024,…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · 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, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 07/24/2025 to 07/31/2025, the facility did not ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, raw shell eggs were stored above ready to eat foods, there was bare-hand contact with ready to eat food, and there was a missing section of floor tile that was dirty. The findings are: Review of the undated facility policy Food Storage (item #11e - refrigerated storage) included cooked foods must be stored above raw foods to prevent contamination. Raw animal foods should be separated from each other and stored on lower shelves (below cooked foods or raw fruits and vegetables) and in drip proof containers.During an observation on 07/24/2025 at 8:55 AM, there was a cardboard box with crates of raw shell eggs stored on the third shelf of a wire storage rack directly above a pan with plastic wrapped thin-sliced ready to eat meats (ham and salami) inside the walk-in cooler in the main kitchen. During an…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · 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 review conducted during a Recertification Survey from 07/24/2025 to 07/31/2025, the facility did not establish and 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 for two (2) (Residents #43 and #95) of three (3) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Specifically, Resident #43 was on enhanced barrier precautions (techniques used to prevent transmission of infectious disease utilizing gloves and gowns with all high-contact care) and staff were observed providing wound care without the appropriate personal protective equipment (gown). Resident #95 did not have enhanced barrier precautions signage outside their room and staff were observed providing hands on care without appropriate personal protective equipment (gown and gloves). Additionally, there was lack of hand hygiene and glove changes during wound…

    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 · E2024-02-16 · 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 Standard Recertification Survey, it was determined that for three (Employees #1, #2, and #5) of six recently hired employees the facility did not implement written policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation, and/or misappropriation of resident property related to screening of prospective employees. Specifically, a nurse aide registry abuse screening was not completed for recently hired employees prior to starting work. The findings are: A review of the undated facility policy titled: Abuse, Neglect and Mistreatment Prohibition, Investigation, and Reporting included that all staff that are being considered for hire must also be checked with the New York State Nurse Aide Registry (Prohibition/Prevention Procedures, Section 3). On 2/14/24 from 8:30 AM to 9:48 AM, recently hired employee files were provided to the surveyor for review and included the following: Employee #1 was hired on 8/21/23 as the Dietary Director and the nurse aide registry screen for prior abuse findings was not completed until 8/30/23.…

    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 · E2024-02-16 · tag F0836 — pattern
    Ensure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that the facility did not ensure compliance with all applicable State codes. Specifically, the facility was not in compliance with Section 915 of the 2015 Edition of the International Fire Code as adopted by New York State, which requires the use of carbon monoxide detection in a building that has fuel-burning appliances. The findings are: On 2/13/24 from 8:35 AM to 11:50 AM the surveyor was provided with facility preventative maintenance, testing, and inspection records. A review of these records did not include testing documentation for carbon monoxide detectors located throughout the facility. During an interview on 2/13/24 at 10:21 AM, the Director of Environmental Services stated that there is a sticker on the carbon monoxide detector to show the date tested. The Director of Environmental Services further stated that they would ask the Maintenance Worker if they keep a log of testing. During an interview on 2/13/24 at 10:30 AM, the Maintenance Worker stated 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-02-16 · tag F0868 — pattern
    Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey, the facility did not maintain a Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee consisting at a minimum of the Director of Nursing services, the Medical Director or his/her designee, at least three other members of the facility's staff, one of who much be an individual in a leadership role, and the Infection Preventionist. Specifically, the facility could not provide evidence that the Infection Preventionist attended the Quality Assurance Improvement Performance meetings on a regular basis. This is evidenced by the following: Review of the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings last three Sign-In Sheets dated 8/8/23, 10/17/23 and 1/23/24 did not include the presence of the Infection Preventionist. During an interview on 2/16/24 at 2:19 PM, The Administrator stated the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Committee meetings are held quarterly and members in attendance included departmental leadership, the Medical Director, the Director of Nursing, and the Administrator.…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    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 interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey it was determined that for one (Residents #67) of five residents reviewed for immunizations, the facility was unable to provide documentation that the resident who was eligible had been offered, declined, and/or educated on the pneumococcal immunization or had received it prior to admission. This is evidenced by the following. The facility policy, Resident Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccine, dated November 2023, included that each resident (upon admission) will be offered the pneumococcal vaccine and the influenza vaccine. Before offering the vaccines each resident/resident representative will receive education and information regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the immunizations. Resident #67 was admitted to the facility over two years ago and had diagnoses that included malnutrition, chronic obstructive lung disease and chronic pain. The most recent Minimum Data Set Resident assessment dated [DATE] revealed…

    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 before2022-05-13 · 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 observations and interviews, and conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 5/13/22, it was determined that for one of one main kitchen, the facility did not store, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, a storage unit containing potentially hazardous foods was not maintained in good repair, a refrigeration unit had a damaged seal, a handwash sink was not accessible, and a ceiling fan and tiles were dirty. This is evidenced by the following: 1. During the initial brief tour of the main kitchen on 5/9/22 from 8:45 a.m. to approximately 9:15 a.m., observations and interviews included the following: a. A 'curtain cooler' (portable one door refrigeration unit) used for production beverages was inoperable with regard to refrigeration, and the door did not latch closed. Trays with milk and other beverages were observed within this cooler and the temperature of chocolate milk in a cup was 59 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). During an interview at this time, the Food Service Director (FSD) stated that the…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-13 · 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 observation, interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey conducted 5/9/22 to 5/13/22, the facility did not establish and 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 disease and infections. Specifically, three Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) did not apply the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) prior to entering and exiting resident's rooms that were on transmission-based precautions (TBP or quarantine) due to COVID-19 infections and/or exposures. This was evidenced by the following: The facility policy, R2 HCC Quarantine and Isolation Precautions COVID-19 Guidelines dated August 2021, under subtitles quarantine and isolation, documented that all staff are to comply with the recommendations of the CDC, and the Department of Health when using PPE. 1.In an observation on 5/9/22 at 10:09 a.m., CNA #1 (listed by facility…

    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 · D2022-05-13 · tag F0888 — isolated
    Ensure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
    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, interviews and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey completed 5/9/22 to 5/13/22 the facility did not ensure that all staff, except for those staff who have been granted exemptions to the vaccination requirements or staff for whom COVID-19 vaccination must be temporarily delayed, as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have received, at a minimum, one dose of a single-dose vaccine or all doses of a multiple vaccine series prior to providing care/treatment/services for the facility and/or its residents. This resulted in a 94.1% COVID-19 staff vaccination rate. In addition, the facility had 13 residents who were currently positive for COVID-19 and had observations of noncompliant infection control practices by staff. This was evidenced by the following: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Safety & Oversight (QSO) memorandum 22-07-ALL, Long-Term Care and Skilled Nursing Facility Attachment A, posted 12/28/21 and revised on…

    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
  • No harm found · B2024-02-16 · tag F0732 — pattern
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during a Recertification Survey it was determined that the facility did not consistently post the daily nurse staffing information to include the daily resident census, the total number and actual hours worked by the licensed and certified nurses and must post the data on a daily basis at the beginning of each shift and be readily accessible to residents and visitors. Specifically, the nursing staff information was not updated to reflect any staffing changes throughout the day per the regulations. This is evidenced by the following: In an observation on 2/12/24 at 12:59 PM, the printed daily nurse staffing posting dated 2/12/24 listed the resident census as 100. There was no documentation to reflect updated staffing changes if applicable. In an observation on 2/14/24 at 1:00 PM, the printed daily nurse staffing posting dated 2/14/24 listed the Resident Census as 100. There was no documentation to reflect updated staffing changes if applicable. Review of the printed daily nurse staffing postings dated 11/1/23 through…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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 HURLBUT CARE — 13 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 2 of 53.8-1.8 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.8-0.8 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.4-1.4 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
CURLETTA, MARKIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/16/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 1 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.

$10.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-24.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$809K
Related-party expense7% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 87%Medicare 1%Other / private 12%

About 87% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $809K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$346per resident / day
operating cost
$10,520per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$277per 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 335341. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, 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