Elderwood At Ticonderoga

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.

32.9% 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 77 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 54.4% 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 46 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 84 beds and averages 81.4 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.01 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.85 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 2.73 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.12 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2025-08-20 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately 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

  Based on record review and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (Case #2577186), the facility did not ensure they immediately consulted with the resident's physician when there was a significant change in condition for one (1) (Residents #1) of one (1) resident reviewed for significant changes. Specifically, for Resident #1 the physician was not notified that the resident had pulled out the urinary catheter. This is evidenced by:The Facility's Policy and Procedure titled, Change in Resident Condition Assessment, last modified 4/12/2018, documented; A change of condition is defined as a major change in the resident's status that: 1. Is not self-limiting. 2. Impacts one or more areas of health status. 3. Requires review/revision of the care plan. The procedure staff were to follow was documented as: 1. The change of condition is documented in the resident's medical record. 2. The physician will be contacted to determine the need for medical intervention.Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of acute pyelonephritis (kidney infection), multiple sclerosis…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-20 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide 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

  Based on record reviews and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (Case #2577186), the facility did not ensure that a resident with an indwelling catheter, received the appropriate care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that resident's catheter care was provided. This is evidenced by:A review of facility policies documents that the facility had policies for insertion of an indwelling catheter for male patients last modified on 1/23/2028, removal of supra-pubic or indwelling catheter last revised on 4/11/2028, and the daily care of an indwelling catheter last modified on 11/22/2023. The policies did not address unintended removal of a catheter.Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of acute pyelonephritis (kidney infection), multiple sclerosis (a disease in which the immune system eats away at the protective covering of nerves), and chronic kidney disease stage four (4). The Minimum Data Set (, an assessment tool) dated, 6/12/2025 documented the resident could be understood,…

  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 · Fcited before2024-07-15 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — widespread
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the provision of nutritional and hydration care and services to each resident, consistent with the resident's comprehensive assessment, therapeutic diet, and preferences for 4 (Residents #3, #23, #24 and #63) of 5 residents reviewed. Specifically, Residents #3, #23, and #63 were not monitored for weight loss, assessed when significant weight loss occurred, and did not receive correct meals consistent with physician ordered diets and recommendations for meal/caloric intake. Additionally, Residents #24 and #63 were not monitored for dehydration and beverages were not offered throughout the day. This is evidenced by: Cross-referenced to F805: Food in Form to Meet Individual Needs and F804: Nutritive Value/Appearance/Palatability The facility policy, Nutrition and Hydration Needs, last revised 7/19/2018, documented the Registered Dietitian or Diet Technician would assess the nutritional needs of each…

  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 · F2024-07-15 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — widespread
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  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 during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure food was prepared in a form designed to meet the individual needs for 5 of 5 residents (Residents #3, #10, #23, #35, and #48) reviewed for diet consistency. Specifically, the Resident #3, #10, #23, #35, and #48 received meals that were not consistent with their physician ordered diets. This is evidenced by: Cross-referenced to F692: Nutrition/Hydration The facility policy, Nutrition and Hydration Needs, last revised 7/19/2018, documented the Registered Dietitian or Diet Technician would assess the nutritional needs of each resident upon admission and as needed. Factors used to estimate needs included but were not limited to the resident ' s diagnosis, comorbidities, lab values and skin status. The facility ' s Diet Manual, reviewed 5/14/2024, documented in accordance with the International Dysphagia Diet Standardization Initiative (IDDSI), diet consistency which was ordered as easy to chew included…

  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 · E2024-07-15 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observation, and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure each resident received food and drink that was palatable, flavorful, and at an appetizing temperature for 2 of 2 test trays (the 7/09/2024 and 7/10/2024 lunch meals) reviewed. Specifically, food and beverages served to residents for the 7/09/2024 and 7/10/2024 lunch meals on the Adirondack and Patriot main Dining Room were not palatable. Additionally, multiple residents complained of food palatability during the monthly facility Food Forum meetings. This was evidenced by: Food Forum Meeting documentation included the following concerns: - On 5/06/2024 all residents in attendance stated the soups lacked consistency. Some items such as rice, pork chops, and chicken were dry. One unnamed individual stated their hamburger was served on bread instead of a hamburger bun. - On 6/03/2024 residents requested more robust tastes, more gravy made available, and butter served with rolls, biscuits, and rice. During an observation on the Patriot main Dining Room on 7/09/2024 at 12:30…

  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 · D2024-07-15 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the resident had a right to be treated with respect and dignity, including: The right to be free from any physical or chemical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience, and not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 (Resident #47) of 4 residents reviewed for restraints. Specifically, Resident #47 had a chair alarm (a pad placed on a chair) hooked to a sensor box that alarmed if a resident attempted to stand) on their wheelchair to alert staff if they attempted to stand up. This is evidenced by: Resident #47 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of dementia with mood disturbance, a stroke (a medical condition in which poor blood flow to the brain causes cell death), and generalized muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 7/04/2024, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment, could be understood, and could understand…

  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 before2024-07-15 · 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 a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure it developed and implemented a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights for 1 (Resident #47) of 20 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Specifically, Resident #47 did not have a comprehensive care plan for the chair alarm (a pad placed on a chair that is hooked to a sensor box). It alarmed if a resident attempted to stand) on their wheelchair to alert staff if they attempted to stand up. This is evidenced by: Resident #47 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of dementia with mood disturbance, a stroke, and generalized muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 7/04/2024, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment, could be understood, and could understand others. The Policy and Procedure titled, Care Planning (Interdisciplinary Team) last modified on 01/22/2019, documented the interdisciplinary team would develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care…

  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 · D2024-07-15 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
  Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
  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 during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that it provided, based on the comprehensive assessment, care plan, and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing activities program to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 2 (Resident #'s 10 and 24) of 3 residents reviewed for activities. Specifically, Resident #'s 10 and 24 were not provided with activities on an ongoing basis according to the residents' Comprehensive Care Plan and activities provided did not meet the residents' preferences. This is evidenced by: A facility policy titled Activity Program Content and Planning dated 7/23/2018 and last revised 7/12/2018, documented that the Director of Activities would establish a plan for a leisure-time activities program for residents of the facility to include individual and group programs seven days a week at various times of the day and evening. To meet these programming…

  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 · D2024-07-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assured the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals according to professional standards for 1 (Resident #21) of 11 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #21 was observed being administered a controlled substance which was not signed out on the controlled Drug and the medication was documented as administered on the Medication Administration Record. This is evidenced by: The facility ' s Medication Administration Policy and Procedure effective 1/25/2024, documented under Administration of Controlled Substances section, the registered nurse/licensed practical nurse would sign for the needed dose for the resident on the Controlled Drug Receipt record. Additionally, under Administration of Controlled Substances, Prior to administration, the amount to be administered would be recorded on the Controlled Substance Inventory Record and the Medication administration would be recorded on…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards of practice in 1 of 2 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. This is evidenced by: The facility policy Medication Administration Methods, dated [DATE] documented medication expiration dates should be checked prior to administration. No facility policy was provided regarding the requirements for labeling insulin pens with the observed sticker showing the date opened and date of expiration. During an observation of the Patriot Unit medication cart on [DATE] at 11:33 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse #3, there was 1 opened Basaglar (glargine, long-acting insulin) Kwik insulin pen with a sticker documenting the date opened without the expiration date filled out. During an interview on [DATE] at 11:33 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse #4 stated the person who opened the Basaglar Kwik insulin pen 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.

  Pharmacy Service 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

$4,516 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $4,516 — penalty dated 2024-01-30

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ELDERWOOD — 17 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

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.

About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $748K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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