Tolstoy Foundation Rehabilitation And Nrsg Center
100 Lake Road, Valley Cottage, NY 10989 · Non profit - Corporation · 96 certified beds · (845) 268-6813 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (36% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- CMS lists it as a Special Focus candidate — not on the watch list itself, but among the homes CMS is watching because of its recent inspection history
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2025
- 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
- inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (45) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $126,926 in federal fines (most recent 2025-09-02)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 | 22.5% | 14.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 13.6% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.8% | 0.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 23.1% | 19.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 25.5% | 12.5% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 26.0% | 13.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 80.9% | 95.3% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 12.9% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.8% | 19.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.9% | 13.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.2% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 74.4% | 78.8% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.1% | 20.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.2% | 9.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.01 | 1.70 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.85 | 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.
59.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 274 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 58.3% 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 84 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 46% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% 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 | 59.1%CMS range 52.3–65.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 8.7–14.6 | 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 | 58.3% | 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 | 56.0% | 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 | 56.0% | 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 | 39.7% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 96.4% | 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 | 2.6% | 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 | 3.5% | 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 | 8.3%CMS range 6.0–11.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 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 96 beds and averages 57.6 residents a day — about 60% occupied, or roughly 38 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.02 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
45 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2025-09-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — widespreadHonor 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 interview, observation and record review during the recertification and extended survey from 08/21/2025 - 09/02/2025, the facility failed to establish consistent mechanisms for documenting and communicating a resident's choice regarding advance directives to the staff responsible for the resident's care, resulting in staff not being able to appropriately identify Do Not Resuscitate orders for (6) six of 26 residents with Advance Directives. Specifically, Residents #64 and #67 were admitted to the facility with Do Not Resuscitate directives signed at the hospital that were not transcribed to the physician orders in the electronic medical record at the time of admission. Additionally, there was not a consistent process for identifying or communicating the resident's wishes regarding Do Not Resuscitate orders for Residents #9, #16, #28 and #36. Subsequently, the facility's failure to have a system to ensure code status was properly identified and implemented, had the likelihood to cause serious adverse…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · L2025-09-02 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — widespreadProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 survey, the facility failed to ensure that properly trained personnel (and certified in CPR for Healthcare Providers) were available immediately (24 hours per day) to provide basic life support, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), to residents requiring emergency care prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel, and subject to accepted professional guidelines, the resident's advance directives, and physician orders between [DATE] and [DATE]. Specifically, eight (8) out of 14 licensed nurses reviewed did not have current or acceptable completed standardized training and certification. This included six (6) Licensed Practical Nurses (Licensed Practical Nurse #1, #12, #11, #5, #17, #27), and one (1) Registered Nurse (Registered Nurse #3). Additionally, the facility did not have a reliable system to track the cardiopulmonary resuscitation certification status of its staff. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and Substandard…
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 · F2025-09-02 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the recertification and extended survey from 08/21/2025 to 09/02/2025, the facility did not ensure sufficient staff was consistently provided to meet the needs of residents on all shifts. Specifically, residents and family members reported during confidential interviews and group meetings that there were frequent delays in responses to call bells. An analysis of the facility assessment and the daily staffing levels documented on multiple occasions between 07/21/2025 and 08/21/2025 the facility did not meet their staffing requirements set forth in their Facility assessment dated [DATE].Findings include: The Facility assessment dated [DATE], documents that each day the facility will have, in total, nine licensed nurses, 20 certified nurse aides, one social worker and two activity therapy staff members available to meet the resident's needs. The Facility Assessment did not include a break down by shift for nursing staff. The Facility Assessment…
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 · F2025-09-02 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespreadAdminister the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
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 during the recertification and extended survey on [DATE] - [DATE] the facility administration did not use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain, or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Specifically, 1) the facility administration failed to ensure policies and procedures for residents' advance directives were properly identified, communicated, and consistently implemented (See F578). 2) The facility failed to ensure a the policy for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was implemented and there were certified staff on every shift (See F678). Findings include:The facility policy titled Advance Directives Advance Care Planning last reviewed [DATE], documented clinical team members are responsible for reviewing any advance directives and incorporating the resident's wishes into treatment and care provision, as well as continuing or modifying approaches as appropriate as well communicating the resident'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 · F2025-09-02 · tag F0837 — widespreadEstablish a governing body that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies for managing and operating the facility and appoints a properly licensed administrator responsible for managing the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview conducted during the recertification and extended survey on 08/21/2025 - 09/02/2025 the facility did not have a process and frequency by which the administrator reported to the governing body, the method of communication was not recorded, and the governing body did not establish and implement procedures for a clear line of communication regarding the management and operation of the facility. Specifically, the governing body did not receive minutes of the facility Quality Assurance Performance Improvement. The facility did not provide documented evidence that minutes of Quality Assurance Performance Improvement were provided to the governing body. During an interview on 8/28/2025 at 10:38 AM, the Chairman of the Board of Directors stated that the Board of Directors was the governing body of the facility. The management was led by the Interim Administrator. The Chairman stated that they had hired an Administrator who would be starting soon. The management was responsible for administrative duties such as payroll, human resources, purchasing and union dealings. 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 · E2025-09-02 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview during a recertification survey it was determined the facility did not make information on how to file a grievance or complaint available to residents. Specifically, during an 08/22/2025 resident council meeting Residents # 8, 11, 32, 34, 35, 36, 40, 41, 50, 53, 54, 59 and 65 stated they were unaware of the process of filing a formal grievance with the facility and were unaware of who the facility grievance official was.The findings include:A review of the policy titled Social Services/ Complaints and Grievances dated 07/25/2024, documented the Administrator will inform the Abuse Coordinator (Director of Social Services) that a complaint has been made, and an investigation has begun.The facilities grievance log revealed three grievances from: 02/01/24 (initiated by a resident), 03/18/24 (initiated by family) and 03/25/24 (initiated by family). No other grievances were noted for the past 15 months. During an observation on 08/22/2025 at 10:00 AM of the front entrance lobby, and resident units, there were no postings identifying 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 · E2025-09-02 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review during the recertification and extended survey from 8/27/2025-9/3/2025, the facility did not ensure that the resident, resident's representative(s), or ombudsman was notified of the transfer or discharge, and the reasons for the move, in writing and in a language and manner they understand for three (3) of 3 residents (Resident #61, #63 and Resident #66) reviewed for hospitalization or discharge home. Specifically, 1) the facility did not complete a discharge notice or notification of bed hold or notify the ombudsman for Residents #61 and #66 when they were hospitalized . 2) The facility did not notify the ombudsman for Resident #63 when they were discharged to the home. Findings include: Policy and Procedure titled “Written Notification of Bed Hold” dated December 1995 documents written notice of Bed hold must be provided to all residents or representatives upon transfer or discharge. Policy and Procedure undated titled “Ombudsman Notification Discharge” documents 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 · Ecited before2025-09-02 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 and extended survey from 8/21/2025 through 9/2/2025, the facility did not ensure residents were adequately equipped to call for assistance through a communication system that relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area. Specifically, 1) the light above the residents' doors on the second floor were not functioning in five (5) of the 26 rooms (Rooms #202 A, 202B, 205B, 207B, 212B, and 217B). The call lights lit up above the residents' rooms but had no audible sound. Additionally, tap bells were not provided or readily available for three bathrooms (Rooms #202, 207, and 212). 2) The centralized call monitor console at the second-floor nurse station produced an audible sound when room call lights were activated, but it did not accurately display the corresponding room numbers. 3) The facility could not provide the documentation related to staff rounds when the call light system was malfunctioning.The findings include:The facility's policy on the resident call…
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 before2025-09-02 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey the facility did not ensure residents and/or their designated representative were fully informed of their right to an expedited review of a service termination for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #71) reviewed for Beneficiary Protection Notification. Specifically, Resident #71 who received Medicare Part A services did not receive two (2) day notification of the termination of services with the Notice to Medicare Provider Non-coverage (NOMNC), form CMS-10123. The findings are:Resident #71 was admitted to facility with diagnoses including Anemia, Arthritis and Cataracts.The 02/26/2025 admission Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) documented Resident #71 was cognitively intact and received 60 minutes of physical therapy and 40 minutes of occupational therapy.There was no documented evidence of a signed Notice of Non-Coverage for Medicare that was issued 2 days prior to the last Medicare covered day of 04/23/2025. The 08/27/2025 late entry Therapy Note documented on 04/21/2025 Resident #71 was provided 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 before2025-09-02 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview conducted during the recertification and extended survey from 08/21/2025 through 09/02/2025, the facility did not ensure that residents who had pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote wound healing for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure ulcers. Specifically, Resident #1 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a hospital acquired sacral pressure ulcer and there was no documented evidence of treatment or assessment from 08/01/2025 to 08/13/2025. Findings include:The facility policy and procedure titled Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers, revised 01/04/2024, documented it is the policy of the facility to prevent, care for, and provide treatment of pressure ulcer. The policy included to document weekly the status of the ulcer in the nursing notes. Resident #1 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes…
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 · D2025-09-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review during a recertification and extended survey from [DATE] to [DATE], the facility did not ensure that pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring of medications, met the needs of each resident for (1) one of three (3) residents (Resident #47) reviewed during the medication administration task; and the facility did not ensure a system of disposition and reconciliation for all controlled drugs. Specifically, 1) Resident #47's oral hypoglycemic medication was not available for administration as ordered; and 2) Resident #68 was discharged [DATE] and two boxes of Lorazepam concentration, prescribed for the resident, were not counted by two licensed staff members. Findings include: The Policy & Procedure dated [DATE], titled Ordering and Receiving Drugs, Discontinued Drugs and Label Changes documented to reorder medications, peel off the duplicate label on the container and affix it to the order form. 1) Resident # 47 had diagnoses…
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 · D2025-09-02 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification and Extended surveys from 08/21/2025-09/02/2025, the facility did not ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for (1) one of (5) five residents (Resident # 3) reviewed for Unnecessary Medications. Specifically, Resident #3 had blood pressure parameters for Metoprolol (decreases blood pressure and heart rate) and Midodrine (increases blood pressure), and on 25 occasions the medications were given outside of the blood pressure parameters specified in the physician orders. Findings include:The undated Medication Error policy documented a nurse manager is responsible for completing a medication incident report and forwarding to Director of Nursing. Director of Nursing completes a monthly summation of medication errors /omissions, and the information is reported to the Pharmacy, and Nursing Quality Assurance Council for facility QAPI Committee review. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Hypertension, Hypotension, and End Stage Renal Disease. The 11/9/2024 physician'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.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and interviews conducted during the recertification and extended survey from 08/21/2025 to 09/02/2025, the facility did not ensure the labeling of medications in accordance with currently accepted principles and the facility did not ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in a locked compartment. Specifically, 1) an open Insulin pen was found in a medication cart without an open date. The manufacturer recommendation is to date the insulin pen when opened. After opening the medication is considered viable for 28 days. 2) a medication cart was observed unattended and un-locked. Findings include:The Nursing/medication storage policy dated 01/24/ 2025, documented all medications will be stored in a locked cabinet, cart or medication room that is accessible only to authorized personnel.The Nursing/medication administration policy dated 10/2024, documented that it is the responsibility of the licensed professional nurse to be aware of the drugs classification, action, correct dosage, side effects, and any specific manufacturer recommendations.1)…
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 before2025-09-02 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review during a recertification survey the facility did not ensure they maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a sanitary environment and to help prevent development and transmission of infection for two (2) of seven (7) residents reviewed for infection control. Specifically, (1) Certified Nurse Aide #26 was observed touching dresser drawers in Resident #65's room who was on contact precautions. Additionally, there was no contact precaution sign posted outside Resident #65's room and no personal protective equipment bin outside the room/garbage bin for discarding personal protective equipment by or inside the room (2) Certified Nurse Aide # 8 and Certified Nurse Aide # 4 did not wear a gown when providing incontinence care for Resident #23 who was on enhanced barrier precautions and (3) the facility did not ensure a complete infection surveillance plan was implemented for the identification, containment, and prevention of infection.The findings are: The undated policy and procedure titled “Infection…
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 before2025-08-06 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 during an abbreviated survey (NY00374955/724315, NY00364233/724313), the facility did not ensure that a comprehensive person-centered care plan was developed and implemented to ensure services were provided to maintain the residents' highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #5) reviewed for care planning. Specifically, (1) Resident #1 was identified as a high risk for fall on admission and there was no documented evidence of a fall risk care plan being initiated. Resident #1 sustained a fall on 3/5/2025 when they attempted to self-transfer from the bed to a chair and slid down to the floor; (2) on 12/10/2024 Resident #4 reported that their roommate Resident #5 had hit them after they engaged in a verbal disagreement. Resident #4 stated Resident #5 rolled over to them in their wheelchair and struck them two times on their left chest/neck area. Resident #5's room was subsequently changed 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-06 · 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 during an abbreviated survey (NY00364233/724313), the facility did not ensure the resident right to be free from abuse for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 12/10/2024 Resident #4 reported that their roommate Resident #5 hit them during a verbal altercation. Resident #4 stated Resident #5 propelled their wheelchair over to their side of the room and struck them two times on their left chest/neck area.The findings are:The facility Abuse Prohibition Protocol policy last reviewed January 2024 documented all residents have the right to be free from physical and mental abuse. The facilities undated Assaultive Resident (Resident to Resident Altercation) policy documented the residents of the long-term care facility are protected from any physical and mental mistreatment from other residents. Resident to resident altercations is reported immediately to the charge nurse and supervisor. An individualized plan for monitoring resident behavior is…
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 · D2025-08-06 · 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 record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00347972) the facility did not ensure that the resident is free from physical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience and that are not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for restraints. Specifically, on 7/10/2024 Resident #3 who was moderately cognitively impaired and needed moderate assistance for bed mobility was found in bed with their floor mats propped up against their bed and held in place with two wooden night tables preventing the resident moving out the bed. The investigation revealed Certified Nurse Aide #1 was responsible and that Certified Nurse Aide #1 believed that placing the mats that way will prevent Resident #3 from rolling out of bed. There was no documented physician need/order for restraints.The findings are:The facility Restraint-Free Environment policy last reviewed June 2021 documented the purpose is to ensure that Residents live in 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 · Dcited before2025-08-06 · 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 interview during an abbreviated survey (NY00347972/724229, NY00364233/724313), the facility did not ensure an allegation involving abuse was reported immediately, but no later than two hours after the allegation is made if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse and to report the results of all investigations to the New York State Department of Health within 5 working days of the incident for 2 out of 3 residents (Resident #3, Resident #4) reviewed for abuse. Specifically, (1) on 7/10/2024 Resident #3 was found in bed with their floor mats propped up against their bed and held in place with two wooden night tables preventing the resident from exiting. The investigation revealed Certified Nurse Aide #1 who was responsible. The facility did not report the incident to the New York State Department of Health until 7/11/2024 and the 5-day investigative conclusion was not submitted to the New York State Department of Health until 7/17/2025; (2) on 12/10/2024 Resident #4 reported…
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 before2025-08-06 · 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 during an abbreviated survey (NY00374955/724315), the facility did not ensure a thorough investigation was completed for 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for falls. Specifically, on 3/5/2025 Resident #1 had a fall while attempting to transfer themself from the bed to a chair. The accident/incident report submitted by the facility was incomplete with no investigative summary and no staff statements were obtained. The findings are:The facility Accident/Incident Reports and Investigations policy last revised January 2024 documented an accident/incident report shall be initiated for any outward event at the time of that event. An investigation will be initiated to analyze the event in order to prevent reoccurrence. An outward event is considered any unusual circumstance that occurs involving the safety and well-being of a Resident, such as falls. Registered Nurses assess the situation and initiate the accident/incident form and investigation. An investigation includes…
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 before2025-08-06 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview during an abbreviated survey (NY00370834/724309) the facility did not ensure the comprehensive care plan was reviewed, updated, and revised for 1 out of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #2) for care planning. Specifically, Resident #2 had a Stage 2 pressure ulcer to their sacrum and bilateral buttocks. The pressure ulcer worsened to a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. The actual skin impairment care plan had no documentation of the sacral pressure ulcer, measurements, treatments ordered and there were no updates of wound progression and physician findings when physician finding reports were submitted to the facility.The findings are:The facility Development and Implementation of Resident Care Plans policy last reviewed January 10, 2024 documented the purpose is to establish guidelines for the development, implementation, and review of individualized care plans for the residents to ensure high quality, person-centered care. The facility is committed to creating and maintaining…
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 before2025-08-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00374955), the facility did not ensure a resident with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 out 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure ulcers. Specifically, Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] was noted to have a Stage 2 pressure ulcer to their intergluteal medial cleft on their admission skin check. There was no documented evidence that the Physician was informed of Resident #1's Stage 2 pressure ulcer or of any treatments being ordered for the pressure ulcer. The findings are:The facility Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers policy last revised January 2024 documented it is the policy of the facility to prevent, care for, and provide treatment for decubiti. The Physician must be notified of any wounds or pressure ulcers at the time of assessment. Nursing…
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 before2024-07-30 · 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 interview during an abbreviated survey (NY00346485), the facility did not ensure residents were free from abuse for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 6/26/2024 a visitor to the facility reported that while walking down the hallway they witnessed Certified Nurse Assistant #1 punching Resident #1 in their head, in the resident's room. Findings include: The facility abuse policy last revised January 2024 documented all residents have the right to be free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, and misappropriation of their property. Physical abuse includes hitting, slapping, pinching, and kicking. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, used to determine attention, orientation, and ability to recall information) score of 00/15, associated with severe cognition impairment.re impairment, 08-12 moderate impairment and 13-15…
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 before2024-07-30 · 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 interview during an abbreviated survey (NY00346485) , the facility did not ensure allegations of abuse were thoroughly investigated for 1 out of 3 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, a visitor in the facility reported they witnessed Certified Nurse Assistant #1 punching Resident #1 in the head on 6/26/2024, there was no written statement obtained from Certified Nurse Assistant #1. There was also no documented evidence of Resident #1 being assessed by a Medical Physician, a Nurse Practitioner, or Registered Nursing staff. In addition, the residents Certified Nurse Assistant #1 cared for were not interviewed or assessed to rule out abuse. Findings include: The facility abuse policy last updated January 2024 documented that for the investigation of actual or suspected (including alleged) cases upon notification of abuse or potential abuse, the Director of Nursing/designee shall immediately commence an investigation including interviewing, with written, signed…
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 · E2024-06-04 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews during the recertification survey from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that Certified Nurse Aide performance appraisals were completed at least once every 12 months. Specifically, performance appraisals were not documented every 12 months for 5 of 5 certified nurse aides (Staff #2, #4, #8, #10, #11) records reviewed. The findings are: On 06/04/24 at 11:11 AM during an interview with the Director of Human Resources, they stated that about one month ago, they started a project of updating performance appraisals for all employees and during the morning meeting, department heads were advised to complete performance appraisals. The Director of Human Resources stated the Nursing Department has not completed the performance appraisals for any nurse aides. On 6/4/24 at 11:15 AM, performance appraisals were requested from the Director of Human Resources. On 6/4/24 at 11:29 AM, the Director of Human Resources stated they could not find any recent performance appraisals for the selected nurse aides (Staff #2, #4, #8, #10, or #11). Facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-04 · 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, interview, and record review during the recertification survey from 5/28/24-6/4/24, the facility did not properly establish and/or maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment. Specifically, 1) The facility did not ensure cleans linens were transported throughout facility in a clean manor, or that hand hygiene was practice after handling dirty linens. 2) The facility did not have a current Water Management Plan in place; 3) Contact Precautions were not implemented for a resident with Clostridium Difficile infection (Resident#280) and staff were observed breaching infection control precautions. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure titled Infection Control Program dated 1/10/2024, documented the Infection Control and Prevention program aims to provide a clean, safe environment for the patients, nursing staff, medical staff ancillary staff visitors and the surrounding community by monitoring, controlling and preventing…
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 · E2024-06-04 · tag F0887 — patternEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review during the recertification survey conducted 05/28/24-6/04/24, the facility did not ensure each staff was screened, offered the COVID-19 vaccine and provided education regarding the benefits, risks and potential side effects associated with the vaccine for 3 of 10 staff reviewed for COVID-19 vaccines. Specifically, there was no documented evidence of immunization records for Staff #13, #14, and #15. Findings include: During the recertification survey the facility was asked to provide the vaccination status for flu, pneumococcal and COVID-19 vaccines. There was no documented evidence the facility had documentation of screening, education offering or current COVID19 status. During an interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing on 6/4/24 at 11:37 AM they stated they have tried everything to get the staff to be on board with COVID-19 vaccinations, but most employees did not want the vaccine. They stated they got the vaccine records from Human Resources and reviewed them on hire but did not know what happened in this case and was not aware 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 · D2024-06-04 · 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, interview, and record review during a recertification survey from 5/28/24 through 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure residents had the right to a dignified experience for 2 of 9 residents (Residents #328, and #46) reviewed for dining. Specifically, certified nurse aides were observed standing over Residents #328 and #36 while assisting the residents with their meals. The findings include: The facility's policy titled: Resident Feeding Program revised January 2020. Stated the feeding program was designed to assist the residents to regain lost feeding skill ability, restore self-esteem and promote a higher level of physical, social, and emotional wellbeing. 1. Resident # 328 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including dementia, Parkinson's disease, and aspiration pneumonia. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] (an assessment tool) documented that Resident #328 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance with eating. The nutrition care plan dated 5/24/24…
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 before2024-06-04 · 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 record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey from [DATE] through [DATE], it was determined for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for advance directives, the facility did not ensure residents had the right to formulate advance directives. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that Resident #334 had a physician's order for advanced directives. The findings include: Resident #334 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including anemia, malignant neoplasm of prostrate, and occlusion and stenosis precerebral arteries. The admission Minimum Data Set (resident assessment tool) dated [DATE] documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition. On [DATE] at 08:58 AM, a record review revealed Resident #334 had no advanced directives located in electric medical records and had no hard copy of medical orders for life sustaining treatment (MOLST). On [DATE] at 9:22 AM during an interview, Staff #1 (Registered Nurse Unit Supervisor) stated Resident #334 did not have any…
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 before2024-06-04 · 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 during the recertification and abbreviated surveys (#NY00341484) from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure an allegation of abuse was reported to the New York State Department of Health within 2 hours of becoming aware of the allegation for 1 (Resident #70) of 2 residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, the facility did not ensure an allegation of sexual abuse involving Resident #70 was reported within 2 hours of becoming aware of the allegation on 5/6/24 and was not reported until 5/7/24. Findings include: Resident #70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebrovascular accident, dementia reflux and hypertension. The resident's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 3/18/24 documented the resident had intact cognition and was dependent on staff for Activities of Daily Living, ambulated with supervision and was incontinent of bowel and bladder. An Incident and Accident report dated 5/7/24 documented 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 · D2024-06-04 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that the resident and/or resident representative were notified in writing of the reason for the transfer/discharge to the hospital in a language that they understood, and the facility did not notify the Ombudsman for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #18 and #24) reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, Resident #18 and Resident #24 were transferred to the hospital and the facility could not provide evidence that a written notice of transfer/discharge was provided to the residents or the resident representatives and that notification was sent to the Ombudsman. Findings include: The facility policy, 'Notice of Discharge / Transfer', revised February 2018 documented that the facility must issue a valid Notice of Discharge/Transfer to any resident prior to discharge for any reason and to their designated representative, family and/or legal representative and ombudsman. 1. Resident #18…
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 · D2024-06-04 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that residents or resident's representatives were notified in writing of the facility policy for bed hold for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #18 and #24) reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, the residents were transferred to the hospital and the facility was unable to provide evidence that written notice of the facility policy for bed hold was given to the residents or their representatives. The findings are: Resident #18 was admitted with diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease stage 3, and protein calorie malnutrition. The Minimum Data Set Significant Change (resident assessment tool) dated 2/19/24 documented Resident #18 had intact cognition. The Minimum Data Set discharge date d 3/19/24 documented discharge, return anticipated. The Nurse's notes dated 3/19/24 documented Resident #18 was transferred to the hospital and was admitted . Documentation could not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-04 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 5/28/24 through 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure the Minimum Data Set 3.0 comprehensive assessment was completed in a timely manner. Specifically, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #30), the Minimum Data Set admission assessment was not completed within 14 calendar days from admission and/or by the required Assessment Reference Date. The findings include: The facility policy, 'Policy for Minimum Data Set (MDS) Completion' revised January 2024, documented the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) is used, in accordance with federal and state regulations for ensuring optimal care planning and quality of the resident's care. In addition, the assessment coordinator is responsible for ensuring the Interdisciplinary Team complete timely residents' assessments and reviews in accordance with CMS RAI Version 3.0 Manual, Chapter 2 assessment schedules: 1. admission within 14 days of residents' admission to the facility. 2. Quarterly…
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 · D2024-06-04 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that each resident's screen for a mental disorder or intellectual disability was signed and included the required digital ID. This was evident for 3 of 25 residents reviewed. Specially, Residents #18, #35 and #46 did not have the required signatures and digital IDs documented on their pre-admission screening and resident review assessment prior to their admission to the facility. The findings are: The facility policy,' Pre-admission Screen & Annual Resident Review (PASRR)' dated January 2024 documented that all Residents must have a PASRR Screen upon admission to the facility and thereafter when there is a significant change that has a bearing on the Resident's specialized service needs. The screen assesses Residents for mental illness, dementia and mental retardation. 1. Resident #18 was admitted with diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease stage 3, and protein calorie malnutrition. Resident #18 electronic medical record…
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 · D2024-06-04 · 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
Based on observation, record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, it was determined for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #280) reviewed for Pressure Ulcers, the facility did not ensure a Baseline Care Plan was developed and implemented for a newly admitted resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective care within 48 hours of a resident's admission and that a summary of the Baseline Care Plan was provided to the resident. Specifically, Resident #280's baseline care plan was not developed. Findings include: The facility policy and procedure Resident's Baseline Care Plan revised January 2024 documented it is the policy of the facility to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care and to comply with CMS regulations F483.21(a). Resident #280 was admitted with diagnoses which included Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Region Unstageable, Local Infection of the Skin…
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 · D2024-06-04 · tag F0882 — isolatedDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews during a recertification survey from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that the Infection Preventionist (IP) completed specialized training in infection prevention and control prior to assuming the role. Specifically, the facility's designated IP was the Assistant Director of Nursing and did not have documented evidence of completed specialized training in infection prevention and control until 05/29/24. The findings are: During the annual survey Entrance Conference on 5/28/24, the Assistant Director of Nursing (DON) was identified as the Infection Preventionist but did not present a certificate of course completion until 5/29/24. Upon review, the Infection Preventionist had 5 outstanding modules to complete in the program including Antibiotic Stewardship and Occupational Health. During an interview with the Infection Preventionist on 6/4/24 at 11:37 AM they stated they had been in the role since the March 2024 but did not finish the Centers for Disease Control training course. They finished the course and presented the certificate…
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 · D2024-06-04 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and interviews conducted during a recertification survey from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that the certified nurse aides were provided the required 12 hours of training and annual in-services on dementia care management and resident abuse prevention, to ensure safe delivery of care. Specifically, the facility was unable to provide evidence that 2 of 5 certified nurse aides (Staff # 8 and #11), reviewed for Nurse Aide training, were provided 12 hours of mandatory training. The findings are: On 6/4/24 at 11:41 AM during an interview with the MDS Nurse/Staff Educator, they stated they are responsible for documentation of the nurse aide mandatory in-services. On 6/4/24 at 11:45 AM, nurse aide mandatory in-service documentation was requested from the MDS Nurse/Staff Educator. Review of the facility annual in-service training records revealed that the training documentation for Staff #8 and Staff #11 could not be located. On 6/4/24 at 12:13 PM, the MDS Nurse/Staff Educator stated they could not locate the 'Mandatory In-Service Sign-Off Sheets 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 · D2024-06-04 · 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
Based on record reviews and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated surveys(NY00308566) from 5/28/24 to 6/4/24, the facility did not ensure that a resident's representative was immediately notified of the presence of an unstageable sacral pressure ulcer. This was evident for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #229) reviewed for pressure ulcers. Specifically, Resident #229's representative was not made aware the resident developed a pressure ulcer in the facility. Findings include: Resident #229 was admitted with diagnoses which included urinary tract infection, metabolic encephalopathy, and a history of brain tumor. The admission Minimum Date Set ( an assessment tool) dated 10/31/22, documented modified independence for decision making. The resident required limited assistance with eating, and was dependent with all other areas of activities of daily living. No pressure ulcer was documented on the admission assessment. A review of the Care Plan, Potential for Skin Breakdown dated 11/8/2022, documented an intervention to inform resident/family of any new areas of skin…
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 before2024-06-04 · 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
3. Resident #70 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (nervous system disease), cerebrovascular accident, and dementia. The resident's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 3/18/24 documented the resident has intact cognition and is dependent on staff for Activities of Daily Living, ambulates with supervision and is incontinent of bowel and bladder. An Incident and Accident (I&A) report dated 5/7/24 documented the facility Administrator visited the resident on 5/6/24 to encourage them to take a shower. The resident informed the Administrator that They were not taking any more showers because the last time three women pulled off my clothes and dragged me down the hallway naked to take a shower. One of the women squeezed my genitals in the shower 12 times. Resident #70 electronic medical record did not document a plan of care with resident centered goals and interventions to address the resident's activities of daily living which would include showers, dressing and eating. Additionally, there was no plan of care in Resident #70…
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 before2021-06-15 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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, interview and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the residents' call bell system was functioning to enable residents to call for assistance if needed, or for anyone to use in case of an emergency. Specifically, during environmental rounds, 4 of 4 residents (Residents #31, #34, #48, and #78) occupied rooms and bathrooms call bells were observed in non-functioning status. Additionally, one emergency bathroom call bell was partially detached from the wall. The findings are: The facility's Policy/Procedure regarding call light, revised 5/2021, indicated licensed nurse and nursing assistant are responsible for the call light system. The purpose included prompt response to a resident's call for assistance and to assure resident's bedside, and bathroom call light system is in proper working order. Further instructions in the Policy stated that all nursing personnel must be aware of call lights at all times. All call lights must be answered…
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 before2021-06-15 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY F582 Based on the interview and record review conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated Survey, the facility did not ensure that the beneficiary protection notice was reviewed with all residents and/or resident representatives. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that a beneficiary protection notice had been reviewed with 1 of 3 resident/representative reviewed for Advance Directives (Resident # 33). Resident #33 was admitted to facility 3/02/2021 with diagnoses including but not limited to Dementia and Depression. Resident # 33 was discharged [DATE], The resident had a (Brief Interview of Mental Status) BIMS score of 07/10 (severe cognitive impairment) Review of the resident record revealed the facility did not have a signed beneficiary protection notice to indicate it had been given to and/or reviewed with the resident and/or representative. An interview on 06/15/21 at 12:30 PM Social Worker #1 (SW) stated when a resident is taken off skilled services, an occupational therapist, 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-15 · 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 observation, interview and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that an injury of unknown origin was investigated. Specifically, Resident #30 was observed with ecchymosis to the left cheek. Record review revealed that Nursing was aware of the ecchymosis, and the ecchymosis was not investigated to ascertain the cause of the injury and/or prevent potential abuse. The findings are: An undated facility policy and procedure titled Accident/Incident Reports and Investigations documented that an Accident/Incident Report shall be initiated for any untoward event at the time of that event. An investigation will be initiated to determine if abuse, neglect, or mistreatment can be ruled out, and to analyze the event in order to prevent recurrence. An untoward event is considered any unusual circumstance that occurs involving the safety and well-being of a Resident. Examples of untoward events included Injury of unknown origin. Procedures included: the Registered Nurse…
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 before2021-06-15 · 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 observation, interview and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that person-centered care plans with measurable goals and interventions were developed for a resident who is dependant on oxygen therapy and for a resident with skin bruising issues. Specifically; (1) One resident (Resident #31) reviewed for respiratory care, Actual Impaired Oxygen Care Plan was initiated for conditions such Shortness of Breath (SOB), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The care plan had no measurable goals and interventions to address the resident's respiratory needs; and (2) One of 3 Residents (Resident #48) reviewed for skin conditions had no skin care plan in place to address the resident's skin bruising issues. The findings are: 1. Resident #31 is an [AGE] year-old who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but not limited to Dementia, Shortness of Breath (SOB), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Anxiety. 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 before2021-06-15 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each resident's person-centered Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) was reviewed and revised to reflect the resident's current health status. This was evident for 1 of 5 residents (#30) reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #30 was identified with ecchymoses to the left cheek and the Incident/Accident care plan was not reviewed and revised to address this change in skin status and new interventions to protect from further ecchymoses. The findings are: Resident #30 was on admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to acute upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, and Alzheimer's disease. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS: a resident assessment and screening tool) dated 6/12/2020 documented the resident had severely impaired cognition for decision making, was dependent upon staff with assist of one staff for all activities of daily living (ADL's), had active…
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 before2021-06-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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, interview, and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that medications and biologicals were stored and labeled according to current acceptable professional standard of practice regarding storage of multi-dose insulin injection, and the recommended refrigerator temperature range. Specifically, (1) An unopened multi-dose Aspart Flex Pen Insulin (Novolog Flex Pen Insulin) assigned to Resident #26 was observed in a medication cart without a pharmacy dispensed date or instructions; (2) The above multi-dose Aspart Flex Pen Insulin for Resident #26 and a multi-dose Lantus Solostar Insulin Pen for Resident #36 were stored together in a plastic bag in the same medication cart; (3) The medication refrigerator temperature was not maintained at the proper recommended temperature range between 36 to 46 degrees Fahrenheit (F); (4) Four multi-dose Novolin 70/30 Flex pen Insulin and four Bydureon BCise Non- Insulin injection assigned to Resident #3, three…
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 before2021-06-15 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that facility staff followed proper hand hygiene and gloving technique to prevent cross contamination and the spread of infection. Specifically, (1) Hand hygiene was not observed for 4 of 4 residents (Residents #26, #9, #54, and #47) randomly observed during a lunch meal observation; (2) Cross contamination of wounds and wound supplies, was observed; and (3) Removal of soiled gloves and hand hygiene were not observed during wound care procedures for 3 of 4 residents (Residents #31, #34 and #38) reviewed for pressure ulcer. This was evident on one of two units (Lower Level). The findings are: 1. During a lunch meal observation on the on 6/8/2021 at 12:13 PM, Certified Nursing Assistance (CNA #1) was observed with bare hands transporting and repositioning Resident #26, in his/her wheelchair, in the resident's room, for preparation of the resident's lunch meal. CNA #1 bare hands touched 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.
“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
$126,926 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $126,926 — penalty dated 2025-09-02
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CORBETT, DOROTHY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/20/2007 |
| KOSTURA, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/26/2015 |
| KOTCHOUBEY, ANDREW | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/26/2015 |
| LUNDQUIST, DON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/26/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 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.
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
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 335311. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-02, 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.