St Camillus Residential Health Care Facility

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

55.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 558 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 57.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 164 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 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 284 beds and averages 251.0 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 33 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 3.49 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 1.84 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.73 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

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.

24 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-01-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview during the abbreviated survey (NY00331278), the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision and the environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #2). Specifically, Resident #2 obtained and ingested medications from the medication cart and it was unclear whether licensed practical nurse #3 left the medication cart unlocked when it was unattended or whether the lock malfunctioned. After ingesting the medications, the resident required hospitalization and treatment with activated charcoal (emergent treatment for an overdose) and intravenous fluids. This resulted in actual harm to Resident #2 that was not immediate jeopardy. Findings included: The undated Medication Cart policy documented the facility required medication carts to be locked at all times when staff were not actively standing at the cart. Staff were expected to understand and adhere to the facility policy. Resident #2 had diagnoses including vascular dementia with psychotic…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey (complaint #2643650) the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and in a manner and environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. Specifically, during a confidential group meeting thirteen (13) of thirteen (13) residents stated they experienced long call bell response times and multiple observations were made of long call bell response times.Findings include:The facility policy Resident Rights, last reviewed 5/14/2024, documented residents had a right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication with and access to persons and services both inside and outside of the facility. The facility policy Meeting Resident Needs, revised 12/20/2023, documented the nursing staff response to resident needs (including call bells) was expected to occur regardless of credential, title or resident assignment; response to resident needs should take priority over other routine tasks; licensed nursing staff…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for four (4) of seven (7) medication carts (Unit 2 East and West, Unit C, and Unit D) and one (1) of three (3) medication rooms (Unit 2) reviewed. Specifically, the Unit 2 [NAME] cart had insulin pens that were not labeled with the open or expiration dates, and expired medications; the Unit 2 East cart had insulin pens that were not labeled with open or expiration dates; the Unit C cart had insulin pens, nasal sprays, and inhalers not labeled with open or expiration dates and expired medications were left in the cart; the Unit D cart had insulin pens and inhalers that were not labeled with open or expiration dates; and the Unit 2 medication room had supplies directly on the floor under the sink.Findings included:The facility policy Medication Administration, revised 06/20/2019, documented all multidose vials/containers were labeled with the facility provided medication sticker and included the expiration date,…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey (complaint #652393) the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one (1) of one (1) main kitchen. Specifically, in the main kitchen food in the cooler was not labelled, expired food was not discarded, the dish machine was not functioning properly while in use, and food service equipment was unclean. Findings include:The facility policy Food Safety and Procurement, last reviewed 03/2025, documented food would be discarded based on food labels or upon evidence of spoilage. Food which was not properly labeled and dated was discarded. Food service staff would monitor the refrigerators daily and discard outdated food. Strategies to control food borne illness included equipment and utensil cleaning and sanitizing, including the dish machine.The facility procedure Daily Cleaning Assignments, last reviewed 02/2020, documented the refrigerators and ovens would be cleaned daily.The facility procedure…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for two (2) of ten (10) staff (Certified Nurse Aide #35 and Environmental Services Worker #48) reviewed for influenza vaccinations; and five (5) of eight (8) residents (Residents #66, #87, #195, #244, and #268) reviewed for transmission based precautions. Specifically, Certified Nurse Aide #35 and Environmental Services Worker #48 declined the influenza vaccine and were observed wearing their masks below their nose while in resident areas; and Resident's #66, #87, #195, #244, and #268 were on droplet precautions for diagnoses of influenza and/or COVID-19 and staff were observed not wearing appropriate personal protective equipment when entering their rooms.Findings include:InfluenzaThe facility policy Staff influenza Vaccination, policy, revised…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-09 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review during the recertification survey (complaint #652367) the facility failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team determined a resident's ability to safely administer their own mediations, if clinically appropriate, for two (2) of three (3) residents (Residents #108 and #260) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #108 had a prescribed nasal spray on their bedside table and Resident #260 had unprescribed elderberry supplements on their bedside table. There was no documented evidence of assessments and/or physician orders for the residents to safely self-administer medications.Findings included:The facility policy Self Medication, revised 06/18/2008, documented the procedure for self-administer of medications included identifying the resident who may be appropriate for self-medication, a physician order was obtained, and a resident self-medication administration record was completed. A self-medication pill holder that the resident was comfortable with was sent to pharmacy and filled with one week's worth of medication. The pill holder 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-09 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure 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

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure that when a restraint was indicated, the least restrictive alternative for the least amount of time was used and included ongoing re-evaluation of the need for the restraint for one (1) of one (1) resident (Resident #13) reviewed. Specifically, a crisscross lap belt (a nylon belt around the waist and hooked to the back of the wheelchair) was implemented for Resident #13 and there was no documented evidence the device was determined to be the least restrictive alternative or the need for the device was periodically reevaluated. Findings include: The facility policy Restraints, revised 11/2017, documented the use of restraints for staff convenience, for purposes of discipline, or as substitutes for direct care, activities, and other services was prohibited. Restraint use was limited to circumstances in which the resident had medical symptoms that warranted the use and used only to protect the health and safety of the resident, and to assist the resident to attain and maintain optimum levels of physical…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey the facility failed to ensure the development and implementation of a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident to include services provided to maintain the resident's highest practicable physical well-being for two (2) of three (3) residents (Residents #195 and #6) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #195's person-centered comprehensive care plan did not include the use of an anticoagulant (blood thinner) and Resident #6's person-centered comprehensive care plan did not include the use of insulin (used to treat high blood sugars) or an anticoagulant.Findings include:The facility policy Comprehensive Care Plans, revised 10/17/2022, documented the facility would develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that would include measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in a comprehensive assessment. The comprehensive care plan would be…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated survey (2643650) the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, personal and oral hygiene for one (1) of four (3) residents (Resident #17) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #17 had brown debris underneath long, untrimmed fingernails; had foul breath; was unshaven; and did not receive their shower as plannedFindings include: The facility policy Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) Supporting, effective 12/22/2023, documented residents were provided with the necessary services to maintain good grooming, nutrition, personal, and oral hygiene when the resident was unable to carry out activities of daily living. Hygiene included bathing, dressing, grooming, oral care, mobility, toileting, communication, eating, and drinking. The facility policy Shaving, effective 12/29/2023, documented nursing facility would ensure a resident who was unable to carry out required grooming received…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-09 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dialysis (used to filter waste products from the blood when the kidneys do not work properly) received such services consistent with professional standards of practice for one (1) of one (1) resident (Resident #134) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #134 received hemodialysis treatments at a community-based dialysis center and did not have on-going assessments and oversight before and after dialysis treatments including assessment of the dialysis access site, and consistent ongoing communication and collaboration between the facility and the dialysis center. Additionally, the resident was not always provided a lunch meal on their dialysis days.Findings include:The facility policy Coordination of Dialysis Treatment, revised 1/19/2018, the Dialysis Care Coordination Form accompanied the residents to their treatment. The goal was to facilitate communication between the facility and the dialysis center for the purpose of incorporating pertinent…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-09 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey the facility failed to ensure accommodation of resident food preferences for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #4) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #4 did not receive double portions at meals as planned. Findings included:The facility policy Accommodation of Needs and Preferences and Homelike Environment, revised 12/2017, documented the facility would identify and provide reasonable accommodation of resident preferences. The facility policy Management of Resident Dining, revised 06/2025, documented food and drink would be provided per the meal ticket. The supervisor would monitor each meal on the tray line to ensure tray accuracy, including portion size of the resident tray.Resident #4 had diagnoses including food insecurity. The 12/13/2025 Minimum Data Set assessment documented the resident was cognitively intact and had diagnoses of protein calorie malnutrition and depression.The 12/10/2025 hospital discharge summary documented Resident #4 was treated for starvation ketoacidosis.The…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$39,754 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $39,754 — penalty dated 2024-01-22

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 23 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NY