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

St Catherine Of Siena Nursing and Rehabilitation C

52 Route 25A, Smithtown, NY 11787 · Non profit - Corporation · 240 certified beds · (631) 862-3900 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (631) 862-3900 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Mar 20241 actual-harm citation$64,496 in federal fines
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)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2024
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $64,496 in federal fines (most recent 2024-03-22)

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
100 Maple Ave · (631) 265-7671 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
196 W Main St · (631) 360-7776 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
138 E Main St
Park
68 Wildwood Ln · (563) 391-3266 · 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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 fell from 4 to 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 increased12.8%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.7%5.8%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.2%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.5%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 worsened14.5%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.6%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.7%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.7%19.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.0%13.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.2%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.1%78.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission32.1%20.6%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.9%9.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.141.701.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.911.361.80better

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.

60.6% 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 1,332 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

60.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
39.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.60hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.56hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 39.0% 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 554 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 1.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% 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 SNF60.6%CMS range 57.2–63.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.3%CMS range 9.8–12.410.7%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 discharge39.0%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 discharge46.8%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 discharge53.1%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 identified99.8%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 setting97.5%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 discharge99.6%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 worsened0.5%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 hospitalization8.8%CMS range 7.3–10.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.961.02Oct 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

0.71
RN hours/ resident / day
0.95
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.22
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.88
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.40
RN hoursweekends
28.0%
Total nursing turnover
27.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 240 beds and averages 218.4 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 22 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 3.88 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.04 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.83 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-18)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-22)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2024-03-22 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (NY 00335331) initiated on 3/14/2024 and completed on 3/22/2024 the facility did not ensure each resident was free from abuse. This was identified for two (Resident # 9 and Resident #157) of four residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 3/07/2024 Certified Nursing Assistant #2 witnessed Certified Nursing Assistant #1 slap Resident #9 on their leg with an open hand and held Resident #9's wrist to the resident's mouth to prevent the resident from biting Certified Nursing Assistant #1. Immediately following this incident with Resident #9, Certified Nursing Assistant #2 witnessed Resident #157 being roughly pushed and pulled by their arms and legs by Certified Nursing Assistant #1 during care. Resident #157 complained of pain and asked Certified Nursing Assistant #1 to stop; however, Certified Nursing Assistant #1 continued to provide care to Resident #157. This resulted in actual harm to Resident #157 that was 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-18 · tag F0636 — pattern
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey initiated on 08/12/2025 and completed on 08/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that all comprehensive Minimum Data Set Assessments were completed within 14 calendar days after admission and not less than once every 12 months. This was identified for 10 (Residents #81, #87, #88, #100, #109, #127, #148, #291, #302, and #303) of 47 residents reviewed for the Resident Assessment Facility Task. Specifically, Residents #81, #87, #88, #100, #109, #127, #148, #291, #302, and #303's Minimum Data Set Assessments were not completed within 14 days from the assessment reference date. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment Schedule & Completion, effective Date 05/28/2025, documented each resident admitted to this facility will be assessed using the Minimum Data Set tool. Information gathered on the Minimum Data Set will be encoded and electronically transmitted to the State survey agency. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) will be completed based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services…

    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 · E2025-08-18 · 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 record review and interviews, during the recertification survey initiated on 08/12/2025 and completed on 08/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that all quarterly review Minimum Data Set Assessments were completed not less frequently than once every three (3) months. This was identified for 12 (Resident #46, #51, #54, #71, #74, #78, #82, #85, #189, #227, #235, and #285) of 47 residents reviewed for the Resident Assessment Facility Task. Specifically, Resident #46, #51, #54, #71, #74, #78, #82, #85, #189, #227, #235, and #285's Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessments were not completed within 14 days of the assessment reference date. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment Schedule & Completion, effective Date 05/28/2025, documented each resident admitted to this facility will be assessed using the Minimum Data Set tool. Information gathered on the Minimum Data Set will be encoded and electronically transmitted to the State survey agency. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) will be completed based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services…

    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 · E2025-08-18 · tag F0640 — pattern
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, during the recertification survey initiated on 08/12/2025 and completed on 08/18/2025, the facility did not ensure that all completed Minimum Data Set assessments were electronically transmitted to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services within 14 days of the resident assessment completion date. This was identified for 28 (Residents #303, #37, #40, #42, #46, #54, #65, #71, #78, #81, #85, #87, #89, #109, #116, #127, #157, #171, #189, #211, #215, #220, #222, #223, #235, #256, #259, and #285) of 47 residents reviewed for the Resident Assessment Facility Task. Specifically, all 28 resident assessments were not transmitted to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services within 14 days of the resident assessment completion date. The findings include but were not limited to: The facility's policy titled Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment Schedule & Completion, effective Date 05/28/2025, documented each resident admitted to this facility will be assessed using the Minimum Data Set tool. Information gathered on the Minimum Data Set will be encoded…

    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 · E2025-08-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey initiated on 08/12/2025 and completed on 08/18/2025, the facility did not maintain accurately documented medical records on each resident that were in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #46) of five (5) residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. Specifically, the facility staff mistakenly created a preset physician order in the electronic record for the Certified Nursing Assistants to check and replace the oxygen tank when the oxygen supply was low; therefore [NAME] resident who was utilizing the oxygen tank for supplemental oxygen had a physician's order for the Certified Nursing Assistants to change the oxygen tank which was not in the Certified Nursing Assistant's scope of practice. The finding is:The facility's policy titled Oxygen Therapy, last revised on 03/04/2025, documented that oxygen therapy requires a Physician's Order and only Licensed Nurses are…

    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 · Dcited before2025-08-18 · 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, record review, and staff interviews during a Recertification Survey initiated on 08/12/2025 and completed on 08/18/2025, 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 of communicable diseases and infections. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #307) of eight (8) residents reviewed for the Infection Control Task. Specifically, Resident #307 tested positive for COVID-19 infection on 08/12/2025 and was placed on Droplet Precautions. Certified Nurse Assistant #4 was observed not wearing appropriate Personal Protective equipment (eye protection) while serving the resident their lunch meal in their room.The finding is:The facility's Droplet Precautions policy, dated 03/20/2025, documented Droplet Precautions should be used in addition to standard precautions for residents with infections that can be transmitted by droplets. Droplets may be generated by 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-22 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (NY 00335331) initiated on 3/14/2024 and completed on 3/22/2024 the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were reported immediately, but not later than two hours to the New York State Department of Health. This was identified for one (Resident #157) of four residents reviewed for Abuse. Specifically, Certified Nursing Assistant #2 witnessed Certified Nursing Assistant #1 roughly handling Resident #157 during care by abruptly removing Resident #157's blanket and pulling the resident by their arms and legs while turning the resident in bed. Resident #157 complained of pain, yet Certified Nursing Assistant #1 continued to provide care. The facility did not report the allegation of abuse related to Resident #157 to the New York State Department of Health. Cross References: F600 - Free from Abuse and Neglect F610 - Investigate/Prevent/Correct Alleged Violation The finding is: The Abuse…

    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 · D2024-03-22 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (NY 00335331) initiated on 3/14/2024 and completed on 3/22/2024 the facility did not initiate and complete an investigation of an alleged violation of abuse. This was identified for one (Resident #157) of four residents reviewed for Abuse. Specifically, on 3/07/2024 at approximately 6:00 AM Certified Nursing Assistant #2 observed Certified Nursing Assistant #1 abruptly removing the blanket from Resident #157 and startled the resident. Certified Nursing Assistant #1 then roughly pulled Resident # 157's arms and legs during care. The facility did not investigate the incident related to Resident #157. Cross References: F600 - Free from Abuse and Neglect F609 - Reporting of Alleged Violations The finding is: The Abuse Prohibition policy dated 3/11/2023 documented the facility has policies and procedures in place to ensure that all accidents/incidents are fully investigated. The investigative process includes review of all…

    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 · D2024-03-22 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 Recertification Survey initiated on [DATE] and completed on [DATE] the facility did not ensure each resident's Comprehensive Care Plan was reviewed and revised to reflect the current needs of the resident. This was identified for one (Resident #178) of five residents reviewed for care planning care area. Specifically, Resident #178's Comprehensive Care Plan was not updated to reflect a change in the resident's Advance Directives from a Full Code status (Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation-CPR) to a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Clinical Records: Comprehensive Care Planning effective [DATE] documented the interdisciplinary care plans will be individualized to meet resident-specific needs. Resident #178 was admitted with diagnoses that included Atrial Fibrillation, Syncope and Collapse. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #178's Brief Interview for Mental Status score was 12…

    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 · E2022-05-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/10/2022 and completed on 5/16/2022, the facility did not ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. This was identified on 3 of 4 Nursing units reviewed during the Medication Storage and Labeling Task. Specifically, 1) A Lantus insulin vial for Resident #119 was observed opened on Unit 2 A in the medication refrigerator with no date indicating when the insulin vial was first opened; 2) one Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative (PPD) vial was observed opened and undated on the medication cart on Unit 1 B; and 3) two multi-dose vials of PPD were observed opened in the medication refrigerator on Unit 2 B, dated February 2022 and were not discarded after the recommended 28-day period per manufacturer's specifications. The findings are: The facility Medication/Treatment Labeling and Storage Policy and Procedure, last revised on 2/3/2017, documented that the medications are stored according to…

    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 · D2022-05-16 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/10/2022 and completed on 5/16/2022, the facility did not ensure that each resident had a person-centered Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) developed and implemented that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs. This was identified for one (Resident #86) of four residents reviewed for Accidents, one (Resident #98) of one resident reviewed for Communication, and one (Resident #351) of one resident reviewed for Hydration. Specifically, 1) Resident #86's Accutech Security Bracelet (a device to alert staff when a resident attempts to breech an alarmed door) was not being checked weekly for functionality as per the resident's CCP developed for wandering behavior; 2) Resident #98 was identified with a left ear hearing impairment and utilized a hearing aid. There was no documented evidence that a CCP for the hearing deficit was developed; and 3)…

    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 · D2022-05-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/10/2022 completed on 5/16/2022 the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #102) of 3 residents reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #102, who was identified as requiring aspiration precautions and staff assistance for eating, was observed alone in their (Resident #102) room. A lunch tray containing food items was within reach of the resident. Resident #102 was observed attempting to feed themselves for 25 minutes with no staff present. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Accident/Incident Reports (A/I) for Residents, Volunteers, and Visitors dated 6/20/2018 documented the Registered Nurse (RN)/Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) is responsible to implement special interventions to prevent aspiration. This includes but is not limited to having the resident monitored frequently during mealtimes and providing assistance as needed, monitoring for signs and symptoms of aspiration, and communicating to members…

    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 before2022-05-16 · 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, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/10/2022 and completed on 5/16/2022, the facility did not ensure that an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infection was maintained. This was identified for one (Resident #76) of two residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers. Specifically, during a wound care observation for Resident #76 the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #3) did not perform hand hygiene and change their gloves. Additionally, LPN #3 did not follow infection control practices while cleaning the Stage IV sacral pressure ulcer. The finding is: The Facility's Wound Care Dressing Change Policy and Procedure dated 1/27/2016 documented after cleansing the wound per [Physician's] order remove the gloves and place the used gloves in a plastic bag; then wash hands/hand hygiene and put on clean gloves. Resident #76 has diagnoses that include a Stage IV Sacral Pressure Ulcer, Hypertension, 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.

    Infection Control 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

$64,496 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $64,496 — penalty dated 2024-03-22

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
CHOWSKE, JOHNIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/02/2015
VERZI, DENNISIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2011
CELIBERTI, DOUGLASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013
CHRISTMAN, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2017
DAGHER, PETERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
HOFFMAN, JENNIFERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013
LAMBERT, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
MCCARTHY, JUSTINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
O'BRIEN, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
PIETROWSKI, STEPHENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
HAIGHT, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2011

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.

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 335821. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-18, 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