New Vanderbilt Rehabilitation and Care Center, Inc
135 Vanderbilt Avenue, Staten Island, NY 10304 · For profit - Corporation · 320 certified beds · (718) 447-0701 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0570)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 7.6% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.6% | 5.8% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.2% | 0.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.4% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 71.8% | 19.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.3% | 0.2% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.2% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.8% | 13.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.9% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 12.6% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.0% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.8% | 13.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.5% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.7% | 78.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.1% | 20.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.4% | 9.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.03 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.15 | 1.36 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
36.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 187 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 51.3% 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 117 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 36.5%CMS range 28.6–46.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 8.2–12.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 51.3% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 54.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 58.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 98.5% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.1%CMS range 5.7–11.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 320 beds and averages 277.0 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 43 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.40 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% 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
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
40 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 7/9/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, 1) dairy walk-in refrigerator contained undated, unlabeled food items. 2) dry storage room was not maintained at appropriate temperature condition and was observed with expired items, and 3) cold food items were not held at the proper temperatures during tray line service. This was observed during the Kitchen Observation. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Food Safety and Sanitation dated 1/18/2024 documented all local, state federal standards and regulations will be followed to assure a safe and sanitary food and nutrition service department. On 7/9/2024 from 9:36 AM to 10:10 AM, the initial observation of the kitchen was conducted with the Food Service Director. The following were observed: 1. Dairy walk-in refrigerator contained a pan of leftover scrambled eggs and another pan…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-16 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 interview and record review conducted during the Recertification and Complaint survey (NY00335874) from 7/9/24 to 07/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that it promoted and facilitated resident self-determination through the support of resident choice for 1 (Resident #143) of 5 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living, and 2 (Resident #39 and #63) of 2 residents reviewed for Choices. Specifically, the preferred number of showers per week were not obtained and not provided in accordance with Resident #143, Resident #39's, and Resident #63's wishes. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Shower and Bath reviewed 2/2022 documented facility to cleanse and refresh the residents through showering and scheduled for two showers per choice weekly and as needed. 1. Resident #143 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis of Cerebrovascular Accident and Hypertension. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented resident had severely impaired cognition and required…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-16 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY During multiple observations from 7/9/24 to 7/16/24 the following were noted: 2) On Unit 6 a) Rooms 615/616/618-Name plaques were missing near bedroom doors leaving square area of mismatched, scuffed paint, b) Lock on 618A wooden closet was broken, c) a black-colored substance was noted along the floor/wall edge in shower room (lower side of unit), d) Resident #36's wheelchair armrests cracked and missing foam from right arm rest, e) Resident #102's left push handle grip missing and plastic part at end of left anti bar missing on wheelchair, f) Metal lockers and cabinet rusted and scratched (located in side hallway on unit), and g) Chipped paint, mismatched paint, scuff marks, and scratched furniture were observed throughout unit. 3) On Unit 7 a) Large chunk of paint peeled off lower door of dining/day room, b) Mismatched/scuffed paint throughout dining/day room, c) room [ROOM NUMBER] Large rectangular area of mismatched paint, d) room [ROOM NUMBER] About 8 chipped paint on wall by nightstand bed A, e) room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-16 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
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 staff interviews conducted during the Complaint (NY#00335874) and Recertification survey from 7/9/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not assure that menus are developed/prepared/followed to meet resident choices including their nutritional, religious, cultural/ethnic needs. Specifically, 1) Resident #37 requested an ice cream during lunch service but was denied because of kosher dietary requirements, 2) Resident #143's alternative menu selection for lunch meal was not followed, and 3) Resident #58 stated the menus are developed with strict kosher dietary requirements and did not accommodating their cultural preferences. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Menus reviewed on 1/1/2024 documented menus are developed and prepared to meet resident choices including religious, cultural, and ethnic needs. Menu items and available snack reflect religious, cultural, and ethnic preferences of the residents and inputs from resident is considered in menu…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-16 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — patternHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 7/09/2024 through 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program identified and prioritized problems and opportunities that reflect organizational process, functions, and services provided to residents. Specifically, there were 7 repeated deficiencies from the last survey conducted on 5/22/2023. (Refer to: F600, F609, F640, F655, F657, F758, and F880) for further information. The findings include but are not limited to: The facility policy titled QAPI Plan, dated January 01, 2024, documented the system to monitor care and services will continuously draw data from multiple sources. These feedback systems will actively incorporate input from staff, residents, families, and others, as appropriate. Performance indicators will be used to monitor a wide range of processes and outcomes and will include a review of findings against benchmarks and/or targets that have been established to identify potential opportunities for improvement…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/09/2024 to 07/16/2024, the facility did not ensure infection control practices and procedures were maintained to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, 1) Registered Nurse Supervisor #8 failed to practice hand hygiene and glove changes during wound care, 2), Licensed Practical Nurse #4 failed to practice appropriate infection control during wound care treatment, and 3). Licensed Practical Nurse #5 did not perform hand hygiene during Medication Administration for a resident with a gastrostomy tube This was evident for 2 (Resident #189 and Resident #167) of 7 residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcer/Injury and 1 resident (Resident #193) observed during Medication Administration out of 39 sampled residents. The findings are: The facility policy titled Pressure Sore Prevention Program & Wound Care Management reviewed June 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 07/09/2024 to 07/16/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity. This was evident for 1 (Resident #344) of 1 residents reviewed for Dignity out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility did not ensure privacy and dignity were provided when a licensed nurse performed blood glucose monitoring. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Resident Rights Overview dated 04/2023 documented it is the policy of this facility to protect and promote resident rights. It is the policy of this facility to create an environment that strongly emphasizes individual dignity and self-determination while promoting resident independence and a positive quality of life. Resident #344 had diagnoses which included Schizophrenia, Depression, and Diabetes Mellitus. The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented that Resident #344 had intact cognition. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/09/2024 to 07/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents are provided the option to formulate an advance directive and that advance directives are documented for each resident. This was evident for 2 (Resident #502 and Resident #233) of 6 residents reviewed for Advance Directives out of 39 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to discuss and provide information concerning the resident's right and option to formulate an advance directive for newly admitted residents. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Advanced Directives reviewed/revised 03/20/2024 documented that residents and/or health care representative will receive education regarding advanced directives on admission, re-admission, annually, with any change in condition, and as requested by the resident and/or healthcare representative. 1. Resident #502 had diagnoses which included Benign Prostate Hyperplasia and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
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 from 7/09/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not immediately inform the physician when a resident's blood sugar was below the parameter that needed to be reported. This was evident for 1 (Resident #344) of 1 resident reviewed for Dignity out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #344 had a physician's order to notify the physician when resident's finger stick blood sugar (method of drawing drops of blood from the finger for testing the blood glucose level) result was less than 70 milligrams per deciliter or more than 400 milligrams per deciliter. The licensed nurse failed to notify the physician when Resident #344's finger stick blood sugar was below 70 milligrams per deciliter on 07/09/2024. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Diabetic Management dated 01/01/2024 documented the Primary Medical Doctor will be notified when a resident exhibits any signs or symptoms of hypoglycemia, and the current…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 and survey from 7/09/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure services provided met professional standards. This was evident for 1 (Resident #193) of out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, Licensed Practical Nurse #5 was observed administering medications via gastrostomy tube by using the pistol syringe and forcing the medications through the gastrostomy tube. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Administering Medications through an Enteral Tube, last revised 1/1/24, documented to administer each medication separately and to administer medication by gravity flow by pouring diluted medication into the barrel of the syringe while holding the tubing slightly above the level of insertion, then open the clamp and deliver medication slowly. Resident #193 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that include Chronic Respiratory Failure and Dry eye Syndrome. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 30 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interviews conducted during the Complaint (NY#00335874) and Recertification survey from 7/9/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident was provided with appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve their ability to ambulate. This was evident for 1 (Resident #143) 5 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily out of 39 sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #143 was not provided with floor ambulation program as per physical therapy and in accordance with physician's order. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Restorative Nursing Services revised 1/1/2024 documented resident will receive restorative nursing care as needed to help promote optimal safety and independence. Resident #143 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Cerebrovascular Accident, Hypertension, and Hyperlipidemia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented Resident #143 had intact cognition, required supervision…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during the Recertification/ Complaint Survey from 07/09/2024 to 07/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident with indwelling catheter receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore as much normal bowel function to the extent possible. This was evident for 2 (Residents #20 and #160) of 3 residents reviewed for Catheter care out of a sample of 39 residents. Specifically, the Foley urinary collection bag was improperly positioned compromising the devices' ability to maintain gravity drainage and prevent reflux of urine. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Catheter Care, Urinary with a revision date of 12/2019, documented that the drainage bag should be positioned lower than the bladder at all times to prevent urine from flowing back into the urinary bladder. 1.Resident #20 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Coronary Artery Disease, Neurogenic Bladder,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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 record review and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey conducted from 7/09/24 to 7/16/24, the facility did not ensure that a drug regimen review performed by the Consultant Pharmacist was reviewed and acted upon by the attending physician or medical director in a timely manner. This was evident for 1 (Resident #222) of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications out of 39 sampled residents. Specifically, the attending physician did not address the consultant pharmacist's recommendations for Resident #222 as documented that they agreed and will do. The findings include: The facility's policy titled Consultation Review Policy, last revised 3/1/24, documented all consultation will be reviewed by the Medical Doctor/Nurse Practitioner upon consult completion to ensure that there is no delay in diagnosis, treatment, and service. Resident #222 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that include Alzheimer's Disease and Anxiety Disorder. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-16 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY00344855) survey from 7/09/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure a resident was free from physical abuse. This was evident for 1 (Resident #36) of 5 residents reviewed for Abuse out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, on 6/09/24 at 6:51 PM, the Dayroom Attendant sprayed Resident #36 with hand sanitizer when Resident #36 was trying to exit the dayroom. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Abuse Prevention with a revision date of 1/07/2024 documented that residents will be protected from abuse, mistreatment, exploitation, or misappropriation of resident property in accordance with State and Federal Regulations. Resident #36 was admitted with diagnoses that included Bipolar disorder, Alzheimer's disease, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented that Resident #36 had moderately impaired cognition. The Comprehensive Care Plan titled Potential for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-16 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY00344855) survey from 7/09/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were immediately reported to the New York State Department of Health, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made. This was evident for 2 (Resident #36 and #102) of 5 residents reviewed for Abuse out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, a resident-to-resident altercation between Resident #36 and #102 was not reported to the New York State Department of Health within 2 hours of occurrence. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Abuse Prevention with a revision date of 1/07/2024 documented all allegations of abuse must be immediately reported to the Administrator and no later than 2 hours to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency) after the allegation is made, if the events that caused the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY00344855) survey from 7/09/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that all allegations of abuse were thoroughly investigated. This was evident for 1 (Resident #36) of 5 residents reviewed for Abuse out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, the alleged staff-to-resident abuse involving the Dayroom Attendant and Resident #36 was not thoroughly investigated. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Abuse Prevention with a revision date of 1/07/2024 documented the facility will investigate all incidents of alleged and actual abuse, complaints/grievances, misappropriation, and injuries of unknown origin. The investigative process will include statements from staff, witness, residents, interviews with staff, witness, residents, medical record review if applicable, review of employee records. All findings of investigations will be documented. An investigative report will be completed within 5…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-16 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on observation, record review and staff interviews conducted during the Complaint (NY#00335874) and Recertification survey from 7/9/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that Comprehensive Care Plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment. Specifically, the care plan related to Activities of Daily Living was not revised quarterly. This was evident for 1 (Resident #143) of 5 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living out of 38 total sampled residents. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Comprehensive Care Plan revised 1/1/2024 documented each resident will have an individualized interdisciplinary plan of care in place. Resident #143 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis of Cerebrovascular Accident, Hypertension and Hyperlipidemia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment was completed on 2/26/2024 and 5/20/2024. The Care Plan for Activities of Daily Living Functional/Rehabilitation Potential created 11/13/2023 was last revised 12/22/2023. There was no documented evidence 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 staff interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated (NY00344855) survey from 07/09/2024 to 07/16/2024, the facility did not ensure psychotropic drugs were not given to residents unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record. This was evident for 1 (Resident #102) of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medication out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #102 displayed worsening of behavioral symptoms and psychotropic medication was increased without Resident #102 being assessed for possible underlying medical cause. The findings are: The facility policy titled Role of the Attending Physician at New Vanderbilt Rehab and Care Center dated 05/2023 documented the attending physician will periodically review all medications and monitor both for continued need based on validated diagnosis or problems and for possible adverse drug reactions. The medications review should…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-16 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 observation, record review and staff interviews conducted during the Complaint (NY#00335874) and Recertification survey from 7/9/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that medical records were maintained in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for each resident. Specifically, Resident #143 was not provided with floor ambulation program, but documentation reflected that resident was provided with a floor ambulation program. This was evident for 1 (Resident #143) of 5 residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living out of 39 sampled residents. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Restorative Nursing Services revised 1/1/2024 documented resident will receive restorative nursing care as needed to help promote optimal safety and independence. Resident #143 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis that included Cerebrovascular Accident and Hypertension. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-09 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00321932), the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from physical abuse by nursing home staff. This was evident for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #1). Specifically, a review of the facility surveillance camera revealed that on 08/10/2023 at 12:16 AM, Resident #1 exhibited agitation and physical aggression. Resident #1 struggled with CNA #1 and stumbled on the floor. While Resident #1 was on the floor, CNA #1 held Resident #1's arms and their left knee rested on Resident #1's left hip preventing Resident #1 from getting up and as a means to control Resident #1's behavior. A review of the camera also showed at 12:22 AM that CNA #1 held Resident #1 against the wall when Resident #1 chased CNA #1 in the hallway. Cross reference: F604 - Right to be Free from Physical Restraints The findings are: The Facility's Policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-09 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00321932), the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from physical restraint. This was evident for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #1). Specifically, a review of the facility surveillance camera revealed that on 08/10/2023 at 12:16 AM, Resident #1 exhibited agitation and physical aggression. Resident #1 struggled with CNA #1 and stumbled on the floor. While Resident #1 was on the floor, CNA #1 held Resident #1's arm and their left knee rested on Resident #1's left hip preventing Resident #1 from getting up. A review of the camera also showed at 12:22 AM that CNA #1 held Resident #1 against the wall when Resident #1 chased CNA #1 in the hallway. Cross Reference: F600 - Free from Abuse and Neglect The findings are: The Facility's Policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Residents' Property with the last review date of 10/24/2022 documented that it…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-09 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00321932), the facility failed to ensure that each resident received the necessary behavioral health care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychological well-being, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care. This was evident in 1 of 7 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #1). Specifically, Resident #1 exhibited several incidents of aggressive behavior towards staff and other residents. The facility did not evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions to address Resident #1's aggression. The findings are: The facility's Policy titled Behavioral Health Services with effective date of 10/2022 stated that each resident must receive, and the facility must provide the necessary behavioral health care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychological well-being, in accordance with comprehensive assessment and plan of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-26 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 observations, record reviews, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure resident Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) was reviewed and revised upon each assessment. This was evident for 3 (Resident #60, #546, and #97) of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, 1) Resident #60 did not have their CCP related to fluid restriction revised upon change in fluid restriction, 2) Resident #546 was not invited to their CCP meeting, and 3) Resident #97 did not have their CCP related to smoking revised upon noncompliance with facility smoking policy. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Interdisciplinary Care Plan Conference dated 1/20 documented that the facility to hold an interdisciplinary care planning conference to identify resident needs and establish goals. An appropriate plan of action is designed to ensure optimal levels of activity and independence for all residents. 1) Resident #60 had diagnoses of chronic kidney disease and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0570 — isolatedAssure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey conducted from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure a surety bond was purchased to secure all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility. This was evident for 160 residents with personal funds accounts (PFA) out of 249 residents. Specifically, the facility's PFA for 160 residents exceeded the facility's surety bond amount. The findings are: The facility policy titled Resident Funds dated 9/13 documented that the facility's policy to ensure the safeguard of resident funds and ensure fund are accessible as appropriate in accordance with applicable regulations. The resident's personal funds surety bond effective date from 11/14/22 to expire date to 11/14/23 documented the facility obtained a surety bond for $350,000. The facility resident balances as of 5/24/23 documented a total balance of $361,013.10. The facility did not ensure a surety bond was obtained to cover the total value of residents' funds held by the facility. On 05/26/23 at 11:46 AM, the Director of Account Receivable (DAR) was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 staff interviews conducted during the recertification and complaint survey (NY00309251) from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure that each resident was free from abuse. This was evident for 1 (Resident #143) of 4 residents reviewed for abuse out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, on 01/24/23 Resident #143 was slapped on the buttocks by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #3 while being assisted with ADL care. The findings include: The facility's current Policy and Procedure, titled Abuse Prevention Policy and Procedure stated that the facility prohibits all forms of abuse. Physical abuse is hitting, slapping, pinching, and kicking and control of behavior with corporal punishment. All prospective employees will be screened prior to employment to rule out any history of abuse, neglect or mistreatment or resident. All employees would be trained on abuse prevention policy. All incidents will be investigated. The facility will report all incident or violations where…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 conducted during the Recertification survey from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure each resident remained free from physical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience, and not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms. This was evident for 1 (Resident #126) out of 1 resident reviewed for Physical Restraint out of a sample of 39 residents. Specifically, Resident #126, a resident with severely impaired cognition, was observed with bilateral full side rails in place, and there was no assessment, physician's order for the bilateral full side rails (SR), or medical justification. In addition, there was no assessment for the half-side rails that were ordered. The findings are: The facility policy titled Restraints last updated on 12/2009 documented restraints may be used for medical, emergent and in an extreme situation to protect the residents from injury. The policy also documented that all restraints must have a physician…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 conducted during a recertification /complaint survey (NY 00309251) from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure all alleged violations involving abuse were reported to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made. This was evident for 2 (Resident #143 and #18) of 39 sampled residents. Specifically, 1) Resident #143 reported an allegation of abuse and the facility did not report the allegation to the NYSDOH timely, and 2) the facility did not report a resident-to-resident altercation that resulted in pain to NYSDOH involving Resident #18. The findings are: The facility policy titled Abuse Prevention Policy and Procedure stated that All incidents will be investigated. The facility will report all incident or violations where abuse, neglect, mistreatment of misappropriation of property is suspected to NYSDOH according to protocol. 1) Resident #143 had diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview conducted during a Recertification survey from 05/22/23 to 05/26/23 the facility did not ensure that each portion of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflects the resident's status. Specifically, The MDS assessments did not accurately document that four side rails were used with a resident. This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Physical Restraints out of a of 39 sample residents. (Resident #126). The findings are: Resident #126 had diagnoses which include Restlessness and agitation, Dependence on respirator [ventilator] status, and Seizure Disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #126 had severely impaired cognition and required total assistance of one person for transfers and toilet use. The MDS also documented that bed rails were not used. On 05/22/23, from 9:55 AM to 01:55 PM, Resident #126 was observed in bed, alert and awake with padded bilateral full side rails in place. Resident #126 appeared…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during the recertification survey conducted from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not develop and implement a Baseline Care Plan (BCP) within 48 hours of admission. This was evident for 1(Resident #546) out of 1 resident reviewed for Care Planning out of a sample of 35 residents. Specifically, Baseline Care Plan was initiated but not completed within 48 hours of admission, and residents and their representatives were not provided with a written summary of the baseline care plan. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Baseline Care Plans dated 3/16/22 documented that it is the facility's policy to develop and implement a Baseline Care Plan (BCP) to each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care. Resident #546 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Chronic Gout, End Stage Renal Disease, and Hyperlipidemia. The Minimum Data Set 3.0…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 record reviews and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 05/22/23 to 05/26/23, the facility did not ensure that comprehensive care plans (CCP) were developed. This was evident for 2 (Resident #60 and #547) of 39 sampled residents. Specifically, a dialysis care plan was not developed for Resident #60, and an anticogulant care plan was not developed for Resident #547. The findings are: 1) Resident #60 had diagnoses of chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #60 was cognitively intact, received dialysis, and received a therapeutic and mechanically altered diet. On 05/25/23 at 10:01 AM, Resident #60 was interviewed and stated they are scheduled for testing for a kidney transplant today and desires a more liberal diet and meal planning. Medical Doctor Orders (MDO) last renewed 5/7/23 documented Resident #60 was ordered to receive a no concentrated sweets/no added salt diet, non-carb ProSource 30cc twice daily, Nepro…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 reviews, and interviews during the Recertification and Complaint Survey (NY00308839), from 05/22/23-05/26/23, the facility did not ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices. This was evident for 1 (Resident #35) of 1 resident reviewed for Infection Control, out of a sample of 38 residents. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that a Pulmonary consult that was ordered for a resident (Resident #35), with Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), was done. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Consultation Request and Report, dated January 2022, documented that the purpose is to ensure that all consults ordered by the Attending Physician, will be done in a timely manner. Resident #35 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that include Heart Failure, Coronary Artery Disease, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Non-Alzheimer's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents and hazards. This was evident for 1 (Resident #107) of 5 residents reviewed for Accidents/Hazards out of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #107, a resident with a history of holding their own smoking materials against facility policy, did not receive adequate supervision to prevent the resident from smoking in their room. The findings are: The facility policy titled Non-Smoking Facility Revised 9/5/2020, documented the facility will provide appropriate safety education, including location of the designated smoking area. Residents who identified as smokers will keep all smoking materials/paraphernalia with the Recreation Department to ensure safe storage of materials. Resident #107 had a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and pulmonary embolism. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) dated documented…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure a resident was provided pain management consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was evident for 1 resident (Resident #18) reviewed for Pain Management out of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #18 received opiod pain medications and treatment without ongoing monitoring of the efficacy of the pain management. The findings are: The policy titled Pain Management dated 7/2022 documented the nurse should document the pain scale reported by the resdient and a pain scale after interventions were rendered. Resident #18 had diagnoses of bipolar disorder and spinal stenosis. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #18 had moderate cognitive impairment, received opioid medication 7 out of 7 days prior to the assessment, and reported they had no pain at time of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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 staff interview conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that if bed rails are used, correct installation, use, and maintenance was maintained. This was evident for 1 (Resident #126) resident reviewed for Physical restraint out of a sample of 39 residents. Specifically, Resident #126 had full side rails in use without (1) An assessment for risk for entrapment from bed rails prior to installation; (2) review of the risks and benefits of bed rails with Resident #126's representative to obtain informed consent prior to installation, and (3) An evaluation to ensure the bed's dimensions are appropriate for Resident #126's size and weight. The findings are: The facility policy titled Side Rail Use dated 2017 documented that resident will be assessed for functional status on admission, readmission and quarterly. Partial side rails will only be used by a resident to assist with his or her bed mobility. Full side rails are only be used when a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 conducted during the Recertification survey from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure a resident was provided pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet their needs. This was evident for 1 (Resident #446) of 39 total sampled residents. Specifically, a resident was prescribed Allopurinol once a day and nurses were administering twice a day. The findings are: The facility Policy on Medication Administration dated September 2021, documented: The RN shall write verbal and telephone orders and shall read the order back to the ordering Physician or Authorized Practioner for confirmation of accuracy. Also documented Verify the medication selected matches the order and label. and The Licensed Nurse shall verify active medication orders prior to administration and ensure that the intent of the order is carried out. Resident #446 was admitted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews during the Recertification and Complaint Survey (NY00308839), from 05/22/23-05/26/23, the facility failed to establish and maintain infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development of communicable diseases. Specifically, the facility did not follow their policy and procedures to maintain Contact precautions on a resident (Resident#35). with Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV). This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Infection Control, out of a sample of 38 residents. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Guidelines for Isolation Precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in healthcare settings dated May 2020, documented that the purpose is to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, visitors, and employees. The policy also…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-26 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure residents, staff, and the public were provided with a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment. This was evident for 2 (Elevator 1 and 3) of the 3 elevators. Specifically, Elevator 1 and Elevator 3 were observed with detached ceiling panels and dust buildup. The findings are: On 05/25/23 at 10:00 AM, Elevators #1 and #3 were observed with ceiling panels that were warped with multiple screws missing. Ceiling panels in each elevator were detached from the ceiling where screws were missing and the panels were observed hanging off of and separated from the ceiling. The wooden molding on the ceiling of Elevator 1 and Elevator 3 bordered the panels and was observed with splintered peeling wooden strips. The center of the ceiling in Elevator 1 and Elevator 3 had a raised dome with ornate metal casing that was covered with dust and grime. One side of the ventilation panel on the ceiling of Elevator 3 was not screwed in, was detached, and was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Ccited before2024-07-16 · tag F0640 — widespreadEncode 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, during the recertification survey from 07/09/2024 to 07/16/2024 the facility did not ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 comprehensive and non-comprehensive assessments were submitted and transmitted into the Quality Improvement Evaluation System Assessment Submission and Processing system in a timely manner. Specifically, admission, annual, and quarterly assessments were not submitted and transmitted within 14 calendar days after the assessments were completed. This was evident for 53 of 53 residents reviewed for the Resident Assessment facility task. The findings include but are not limited to: The facility policy and procedure titled Resident Assessment Using Minimum Data Set reviewed 01/01/2024 documented that the facility will conduct initially and periodically a comprehensive, accurate, standardized reproducible assessment of each resident's functional capacity. The Minimum Data Set assessments will be completed and submitted in accordance with regulatory time…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2024-07-16 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and staff interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 7/9/2024 to 7/16/2024, the facility did not ensure garbage and refuse was disposed of properly. Specifically, the garbage compactor door was observed ajar, and multiple flies were observed flying on top of garbage inside the compactor. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled Proper Kitchen Trash Disposal dated 1/8/2024 documented all kitchen waste is disposed properly to the compactor. During an observation of the kitchen on 7/12/2024 from 10:02 AM to 10:16 AM, the Dietary Worker brought the garbage to the garbage disposal area located outside of the building. The garbage compactor was observed to be open and there were multiple flies flying on top of the garbage piles inside the compactor. On 7/12/2024 at 10:25 AM, the Dietary Worker #1 was interviewed and stated the compactor door should have been kept closed to keep garbage inside the compactor. On 7/16/2024 at 9:22 AM, the Food Service Director was interviewed and stated the compactor is used by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-05-26 · tag F0640 — patternEncode 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 interviews during the recertification survey conducted from 5/22/23 to 5/26/23, the facility did not ensure Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) comprehensive and non-comprehensive assessments were submitted and transmitted into the Quality Improvement Evaluation System (QIES) Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) system in timely. Specifically, Annual assessments were not transmitted within 14 days of the care plan completion date and Quarterly assessments were not submitted and transmitted within 14 calendar days from the MDS Completion Date. This is evident for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for the Resident Assessment facility task (Resident #s 68, 99 and 147). The findings are but not limited to: The facility's policy and procedure entitled Minimum Data Set dated 1/19 documented that a standardized, comprehensive assessment (Minimum Data Set) will be conducted for each resident. 1) Resident #68 had a quarterly assessment with assessment reference date of 4/4/23 and completion date of 4/11/23. The assessment was submitted late on 5/24/23. 2) Resident #99 had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCHON, ANNA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 15% | since 01/01/2002 |
| SCHON, BARON | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | 15% | since 01/01/2002 |
| SCHON, HENRY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | 70% | since 01/01/1989 |
| BLUSH, JOEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2022 |
| HERSKO, DAVID | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/20/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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.
This home reported $775K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335372. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-07-16, 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.