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

North Shore - LIJ Orzac Center For Rehabilitation

900 Franklin Avenue, Valley Stream, NY 11580 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (516) 256-6700 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0609, F0610) — most recent Jan 20241 immediate-jeopardy citation$41,575 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $41,575 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-02)
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
900 Franklin Ave · (516) 256-6000 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
757 Franklin Ave · (516) 872-8700 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
721 Franklin Ave · (516) 561-6233 · Call to confirm hours
Park
PO Box 670 · (516) 825-4128 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
270 Franklin Ave · (516) 593-7105

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased14.3%14.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.4%5.8%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.0%19.5%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.2%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.1%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication5.6%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers15.1%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.2%19.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.4%13.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%78.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.5%20.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.4%9.6%12.0%worse

§ 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.

67.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 955 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

67.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
88.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.43U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.57hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.81hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 88.6% 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 395 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 1.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 38% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF67.5%CMS range 64.9–70.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.8%CMS range 8.9–12.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge88.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge80.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge85.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge99.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.4%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.7%CMS range 5.7–9.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.031.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

2.33
RN hours/ resident / day
0.73
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.89
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.95
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.96
RN hoursweekends
29.9%
Total nursing turnover
33.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 91.9 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 28 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.33 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.89 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 5.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.13 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 2.48 to 1.96 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-16)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-31)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-08-02 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    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, observations, and record reviews, during an abbreviated survey (NY00338693), the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from significant medication errors. Specifically, the facility failed to have systems in place to ensure that newly admitted and readmitted residents received their Physician ordered scheduled medications. This was evident for one (Resident #1) of 6 sampled residents. Resident #1 was administered incorrect daily doses of two medications, Furosemide (a diuretic used to reduce fluid retention in patients with certain kidney disorders and chronic heart failure) and Metoprolol (a beta blocker used to treat chest pain, heart failure, and high blood pressure), used in the treatment of Congestive Heart Failure, for 12 consecutive days. Subsequently, Resident #1 had increased edema (swelling), significant weight gain and shortness of breath, which contributed to a serious decline in Resident #1's condition. The resident was transported to the hospital where they…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-05-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during a Recertification Survey initiated on 5/12/2025 and completed on 5/16/2025, the facility did not ensure that food was stored and prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This was identified during the Kitchen observation conducted on 5/12/2025. Specifically, the walk-in refrigerator for meat had uncooked pork bacon and prepared raw steak stored over raw salmon. In addition, eight trays of assorted pre-cupped salad dressings were observed in the reach-in refrigerator and were not discarded after the must use-by date. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Receiving and Storage last revised March 2023 documented that all food and supplies must be properly received and stored to prevent contamination and spoilage of foods in storage. Raw animal foods in refrigerated storage are stored away from cooked meats, fruits, vegetables, and ready-to-eat foods. The policy did not document proper storage of raw meats, poultry, and seafood in refrigerators when separation was not…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide 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 observations, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/12/2025 and completed on 5/16/2025 the facility did not ensure that each resident received care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers. This was identified for one (Resident # 6) of the three residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers. Specifically, Resident #6 had a Stage 4 (full-thickness skin and tissue loss, exposing muscle, tendons, or bone) pressure ulcer to the sacrum. The resident utilized an air mattress for pressure redistribution and prevention of further pressure ulcer development. The air mattress weight setting was not consistent with the resident's actual weight. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Pressure Ulcer Prevention: Guidelines for Nursing Interventions, dated July 2023, documented that Registered Nurse and Licensed Practical Nurse responsibilities included to ensure that all interventions/nurse instructions are being performed appropriately…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 5/12/2025 and completed on 5/16/2025, the facility did not ensure it maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This was identified for one (Resident #210) of three residents reviewed for the Infection Control Task. Specifically, Resident #210 was admitted to the facility with a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter in their left arm. The resident was not placed on Enhanced Barrier Precautions. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, last revised 4/17/2024 documented that Enhanced Barrier Precautions are indicated for indwelling medical devices (including but not limited to central lines, urinary catheters/urostomies, feeding tubes, tracheostomy, drains of any kind, etc.) regardless of Multi-Drug-Resistant Organism status. As per facility practice, a physician's order…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, observations, and record reviews, during an abbreviated survey (NY00338693), the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and comprehensive care plans for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #1 received daily, lower-than-prescribed doses of two medications (Furosemide and Metoprolol) used in the treatment of Congestive Heart Failure for 12 consecutive days. Subsequently, Resident #1 experienced significant weight gain and edema (fluid retention). The facility failed to notify Resident #1's physicians of a change in the resident's condition. Resident #1 was transported to the emergency room and admitted to the hospital and expired 3 days later. Findings include: Facility's Congestive Heart Failure protocol titled Overview of Heart Failure (undated) documented the Signs and Symptoms of Heart Failure which included, but was not limited to, the following: weight gain of 1.5 or more…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/25/2024 and completed on 1/31/2024, the facility did not ensure that all allegations of misappropriation were reported to the Administrator of the facility and to other officials within 24 hours of the incident. This was identified for one (Resident #84) of one resident reviewed for Personal Property. Specifically, Resident #84 alleged that Certified Nurse Aide #2 stole 48 dollars in cash on 1/5/2024 and the Administrator was not informed until 1/8/2024. Additionally, the Administrator did not report the allegation to the New York State Department of Health and local law enforcement. The finding is: The facility policy entitled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Resident Property dated 2/1989 and revised 11/2022 documented any alleged violation involving misappropriation of resident property shall be reported immediately to the Executive Director/designee, and when required to 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification survey initiated on 1/25/2024 and completed on 1/31/2024, the facility did not ensure that all investigations for misappropriation were completed within 5 working days of the alleged incident. This was identified for one (Resident #84) of one resident reviewed for Personal Property. Specifically, Resident #84 alleged that Certified Nurse Aide #2 stole 48 dollars in cash on 1/5/2024 and the investigation was not completed until 1/24/2024. The finding is: The facility policy entitled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Resident Property dated 2/1989 and revised 11/2022 documented Misappropriation of Resident Property is the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful temporary or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent. Any alleged violation involving misappropriation of resident property shall be reported immediately to the Executive Director/designee, and…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews during the Recertification Survey and Abbreviated Survey (NY 00331732) initiated on 1/25/2024 and completed on 1/31/2024 the facility did not ensure that each resident received treatment and services that meet professional standards of Quality. This was identified for one (Resident #88) of three residents reviewed for Discharge. Specifically, the facility staff did not assess or obtain a Physician's order to perform wound care to Resident #88's spinal surgical wound and administered wound care without a Physician's order. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Dressing and Wound Care, last reviewed September 2023, documented that wound care is performed as per the direction of the Physician/Nurse Practitioner. Review physician orders regarding cleansing agents, treatment orders, and covering dressings. Verify orders on the electronic treatment administration record. Resident #88 was admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease, Hypertension, and 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · tag F0742 — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
    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 initiated on 1/25/2024 and completed on 1/31/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder, receives appropriate treatment and services to correct the assessed problem or attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being. This was identified for one (Resident #58) of one resident reviewed for Mood and Behavior. Specifically, Resident #58, who was identified by the facility on 9/22/2023 as having thoughts that they would be better off dead and had a Physician's order for Psychology services added to their chart at their request on 9/22/2023 and renewed in October, November, and December 2023. The resident was never evaluated by the Psychologist. The resident was again identified by the facility on 1/12/2024 as stating they were currently depressed and felt that they…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/25/2024 and completed on 1/31/2024, the facility did not establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This was identified for one (Resident #243) of one resident reviewed for Skin Condition. Specifically, during the wound care observation of Resident #243's left knee surgical wound, Registered Nurse #3, the treatment nurse, was observed wearing gloves and sanitizing the bedside table, setting up the wound care supplies, and removing the old dressing from the left knee. Registered Nurse #3 then prepared to apply the new dressing. During the entire observation, Registered Nurse #3 did not change their gloves and did not wash their hands. The finding is: The facility's policy titled, Dressing and Wound Care last reviewed September 2023, documented the purpose is to prevent infection of wounds and…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-01-31 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey completed on 1/31/2022, the facility did not ensure that care was implemented to meet each resident's medical and nursing needs for one (Resident #8) of two residents reviewed for Skin Conditions. Specifically, during observation of Resident #8's colostomy care, Registered Nurse (RN) #1 did not apply skin barrier (product used to protect skin from contacting the fecal matter) prior to applying the colostomy wafer (a plastic ring that is applied to the skin around the colostomy and which the colostomy pouch is attached to) as per the Physician's order. The finding is: The facility's policy titled Colostomy Care, last revised 12/2020, documented to apply skin barrier to the peristomal skin (skin around the colostomy opening). Let it air dry. The skin barrier protects the skin from contact with fecal material. Resident #8 was admitted with diagnoses including Cancer, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, and Colostomy. The Quarterly Minimum…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$41,575 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $41,575 — penalty dated 2024-08-02

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NORTHWELL HEALTHCARE INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/01/2015
CUSACK, MICHELEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/12/2017
DOWLING, MICHAELIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2015
LYNCH, CHRISTOPHERIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2000
PHILIP, ARPANIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2000
SOLAZZO, MARKIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2015
BATTINELLI, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
CLASTER, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2015
COSTALAS, KONSTANTINEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
CROTTY, MARGARETIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
DRUMMOND, DONNAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
EPSTEIN, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
GALLO, KATHLEENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
GINDI, HARRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
GLOADE, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
GOLDSTEIN, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2015
KRAEMER, LAURENCEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
KRAUT, JEFFREYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
MACK, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2015
MILLER, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2017
MOSCOLA, JOSEPHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
NAPPI, RALPHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2015
ROSENTHAL, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
RUBENSTEIN, BARRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2015
TANGNEY, EUGENEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
ZUCKER, DONALDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 29 rows in the source record cover these 26 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

What families pay in NY

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New York Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in New York
$15,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,110/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 335700. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-16, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next