Vestal Park Rehabilitation And Nursing Center
1501 Route 26 South,, Vestal, NY 13850 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 180 certified beds · (607) 754-4105 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (63%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 22% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 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
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 improved from 1 to 2 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 | 8.2% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.4% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.9% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 19.5% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 3.4% | 3.1% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.2% | 12.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.8% | 13.2% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.1% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.5% | 6.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.6% | 19.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.5% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.7% | 78.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.5% | 20.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.7% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.58 | 1.70 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.60 | 1.36 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
52.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 196 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 63.0% 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 108 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 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 57% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 52.3%CMS range 44.2–57.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.8%CMS range 8.2–13.5 | 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 | 63.0% | 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 | 47.2% | 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 | 63.0% | 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 | 98.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 97.1% | 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 | 97.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.7% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.1%CMS range 4.0–9.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.97 | 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 180 beds and averages 152.4 residents a day — about 85% 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 3.82 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.18 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.05 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 63% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-18 · 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 review and interview during the abbreviated (NY00329596) survey the facility did not consult with the resident's physician and notify the resident representative when there was a need to alter treatment significantly for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed. Specially, Resident #1 was not administered twenty doses of their physician ordered antipsychotic medication and there was no documented evidence the physician or the resident representative was notified. Findings include: The facility policy, Notifying the Provider, revised 10/2013, documented the resident's physician would be updated with any changes in a resident that may affect significant change status. The facility policy, Unavailable Medications revised 8/2020 documented the facility must make every effort to ensure medications are available to meet the needs of each resident. Nursing staff should notify the attending physician (or on-call if applicable) of the situation, explain the circumstances, expected availability, and alternative therapies available. If the facility nurse was unable to reach 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 · D2024-10-18 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the abbreviated survey (NY00329596) the facility did not ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed. Specially, Resident #1 was not administered twenty doses of their physician ordered anti-psychotic medication. Findings include: The facility policy, Notifying the Provider, revised 10/2013 documented the resident's physician would be updated with any changes in a resident that may affect significant change status. The facility policy, Unavailable Medications, revised 8/2020, documented the facility must make every effort to ensure medications were available to meet the needs of each resident. Nursing staff should notify the attending physician (or on-call if applicable) of the situation, explain the circumstances, expected availability, and alternative therapies available. If the facility nurse was unable to reach the attending physician or the on-call physician, then…
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 · F2024-07-26 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespreadEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure licensed nurses had specific competencies and skill sets necessary to care for residents' needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care for 4 licensed nurses (Licensed Practical Nurses #22, #26, #35 and Registered Nurse #27); and did not ensure certified nurse aides were able to demonstrate competency in skills and techniques necessary to care for resident's needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care for 2 certified nurse aides (Certified Nurse Aides #12 and #36). Specifically: - Licensed Practical Nurse #22 left medications at a resident's bedside who did not have a physician order for medication self-administration. Licensed Practical Nurse #22 did not receive an annual competency evaluation for medication administration. (see F 689) - Certified Nurse Aide #12 was observed entering a resident's room who was on transmission based precautions, without proper personal…
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 · Fcited before2024-07-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the main kitchen. Specifically, food was not maintained at proper temperatures and the dishwasher was not maintaining the proper temperature. Findings include: The Food Service Department policy, Maintaining Food Temps, last reviewed 4/2012 documented food would be prepared, stored, and transported in a manner that would ensure proper serving temperatures. Food Temperatures: During an observation in the main kitchen on 7/23/2024 at 11:18 AM, chicken salad was observed in the walk-in cooler. The chicken salad was covered and was in a large plastic hotel sized pan that was 6 inches deep. The chicken salad contained 10 pounds of chicken, 1 gallon of mayonnaise, and additional ingredients. The chicken salad's temperature was measured at 52 degrees Fahrenheit. During an interview on 7/23/2024 at 11:19 AM, Prep Cook/Dietary Aide…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #127, #148, and #146) reviewed. Specifically, Residents #127, #148 and #146 had medications left unattended in their rooms. Additionally, there was no documented evidence Residents #127, #148 and #146 were assessed to determine their ability to safely administer medications or had physician orders to self-administer their medications. Findings include: The facility policy, Administration Procedures for All Medications, dated 8/2020 documented medications would be administered in a safe and effective manner. The facility policy, Self- Administering of Medications, dated 5/8/2015 documented each resident's ability to self-administer mediation would be assessed upon admission. The interdisciplinary team would meet and complete an assessment form to decide to trial a resident for self-administration of medications. The charge nurse would…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · 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
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00323929 and NY00339707) surveys conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure residents were treated with respect and dignity in a manner and environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of quality of life for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #71) reviewed. Specifically Resident #71's urinary catheter drainage bag was uncovered and visible to other residents, visitors, and staff. The facility policy, Quality of Life-Dignity, revised 3/2024 documented residents should be cared for in a manner that promoted and enhanced their sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, feeling of self-worth and self-esteem. Residents were treated with dignity and respect at all times. Staff was expected to promote dignity and assist residents in keeping urinary catheter bags covered. Resident #71 had diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, dementia, and urinary retention (neurogenic bladder, lack of bladder control due to a nerve problem). The 4/17/2024 Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure the development and implementation of a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 4 of 6 residents (Resident #20, #69, #71, and #83) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #71's and #83's care plan did not include the use of an anticoagulant (blood thinner) or insulin (used to treat diabetes); Resident #20's care plan did not include the use of insulin; and Resident #69's care plan did not include specific resident centered care interventions for behavioral symptoms. Findings include: The facility policy, Care Planning/Care Conference revised 9/2017, documented the facility would ensure that a comprehensive care plan was developed for each resident that included measurable objectives and timetables to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs. The facility policy, Dementia-Clinical Protocol, revised 3/2022 documented the interdisciplinary team would…
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 before2024-07-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00289910, NY00305753, NY00316721, NY00323929, and NY00339707) surveys conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 2 of 7 Residents (Residents #88 and #127) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #88 was not assisted with shaving and Resident #127 was not assisted with showering and oral care. Findings include: 1) Resident #88 had diagnoses of age-related osteoporosis (weak/brittle bones), tremors, and depression. The 6/15/2024 Minimum Data Set assessment documented the resident had intact cognition, had no behavioral symptoms, did not reject care, and required supervision/touch assistance with personal hygiene. The Comprehensive Care Plan revised 3/2024 documented the resident had impairment with activities of daily living function/physical mobility related to weakness. Interventions required supervision/touch…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview during the recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not post daily at the beginning of each shift, the current resident census and the total number and the hours worked by licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift, and accessible to residents and visitors for 4 of 5 days reviewed. Specifically, the nurse staffing was not consistently posted. Finding included: The facility did not have documented policy and procedures regarding daily posted staffing. The daily nursing staffing information was observed in a glass cabinet in the main lobby: - on 7/22/2024 at 10:10 AM, 11:35 AM, and 2:20 PM, the daily posted staffing document was dated 7/15/2024. - on 7/23/2024 at 9:08 AM, the daily posted staffing document was dated 7/22/2024 and did not have nurse staffing information for the evening and overnight shifts. - on 7/24/2024 at 4:02 PM, the daily posted staffing document was dated 7/24/2024, and did not have nurse staffing information for the evening shift. - on 7/24/2024 at 4:55…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · 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 during the recertification survey conducted [DATE] through [DATE], the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions when applicable for 1 of 4 medication carts (Brookside Garden medication cart), 1 of 1 treatment cart (Brookside Terrace cart), and 1 of 2 medication rooms (Brookside Terrace medication room) reviewed. Specifically, the Brookside Garden medication cart contained 3 insulin pens without opened dates; and the Brookside Terrace medication refrigerator did not have a complete record of refrigerator temperatures, and the treatment cart was unlocked. Findings include: The pharmacy services policy, Storage of Medications, dated 8/2020 documented medications and biologicals were to be stored safely, securely, and properly, and followed manufacturer's recommendations. Refrigerated medication should be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · tag F0800 — isolatedProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review during recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #107 and #148) reviewed. Specifically, Residents #107 and #148 were missing food items on their meal trays. Findings include: The undated facility policy, Meal Tray Accuracy Audit Report Policy, documented the Food Service Director was responsible for completion of the meal tray accurracy form at least three times a week. The meal tray accurracy form was used to improve accuracy of tray service, resident satisfaction, and resident diet. The week 1 Summer/Spring menu was observed hanging in the hallway in front of the Sunrise Garden nursing station on 7/22/2024 at 10:30 AM. The week 1 lunch menu choices for Monday included barbeque chicken, zesty pork chop, roast beef sandwich on wheat bread, or egg salad sandwich on wheat bread, capri vegetable,…
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 before2024-07-26 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00339707) surveys conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident received food and drink that was palatable, flavorful, and at an appetizing temperature for 2 of 2 meals reviewed (the 7/23/2024 lunch meal and the 7/24/2024 lunch meal). Specifically, food was not palatable or served at palatable and appetizing temperatures during the lunch meals on 7/23/2024 and 7/24/2024. Additionally, Residents #36, #88, #107 and #136 stated the food was not palatable. Findings include: The facility policy, Maintaining Food Temperatures, revised 4/2012 documented food would be prepared, stored, and transported in a manner that would ensure proper serving temperatures. During an interview on 7/22/2024 at 11:11 AM, Resident #88 stated the food was cold and lacked flavor. The chicken and rice casserole was the least flavorful of all dishes. During an interview on 7/22/2024 at 11:39 AM, Resident #107 stated the food lacked flavor and was often cold and had to be heated in the microwave. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey conducted 7/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 certified nurse aide and 1 registered nurse (Certified Nurse Aide #12 and Registered Nurse #15) observed. Specifically, Certified Nurse Aide #12 did not wear a gown and gloves as required in a room requiring transmission based precautions and did not perform appropriate hand hygiene before exiting the room; Registered Nurse #15 did not perform hand hygiene or change their gloves during wound care. Findings include: The facility policy, Contact Isolation Precautions for Clostridium Difficile, revised 3/2024 documented all employees were to follow isolation precaution signage on the resident's doors; residents diagnosed with Clostridium Difficile (an easily transmitted bacteria that causes diarrhea) were to be immediately…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-26 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake 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 interview during the recertification survey conducted 07/22/2024-7/26/2024, the facility did not ensure call bells were adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area from each resident's bedside, toilet, and bathing facilities for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #28) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #28's call bell was not within reach. Findings include: The facility policy, Call Light System Policy, reviewed by the facility 6/2024 documented when finished providing care to residents be sure to position the call light in their reach for ease of resident use. Tell the resident where the call light is and show them how to use the call light. Resident #28 had diagnoses including epilepsy (seizure disorder), cerebral vascular accident (stroke), and aphasia (difficulty speaking). The 8/10/2023 Minimum Data Set assessment documented the resident had severely impaired cognition and was dependent for all activities of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-15 · 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 review and interview during the abbreviated survey (NY00307423), the facility did not immediately inform the resident's representative when there was a need to alter treatment for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #2). Specifically, Resident #2 was prescribed a medication for dementia and the resident's representative was not notified. Findings include: The 11/2009 revised Notification of Family/Responsible Party Regarding Change in Resident Status Policy documented a resident's family/responsible party would be notified regarding any change in a resident's medical status including new medications. Resident #2 had diagnoses incluidng a prior fall and dementia. The 11/23/2021 Minimum Data Set Assessment documented the resident's cognition was moderately impaired and it was very important to them to have family or a close friend involved in discussions about their care. The Health Care Proxy (health care decision maker) form documented on 9/27/2019, the resident designated a family member to make their medical decisions if they were unable to do so themselves. 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 before2022-04-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated surveys (NY00289678, NY00280940, NY00268244, NY00270091, NY00277226, and NY00277318) conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 4 of 8 residents (Residents #54, 90, 115, and 140) reviewed. Specifically, Residents #54, 90 and 140 were observed with unclean and unkept fingernails and Resident #115 did not receive timely assistance with toileting as requested. Findings include: The facility policy Activity of Daily Living dated 9/2009 documented the certified nurse aide will assist or provide ADLs according to the individual resident needs according to specific care procedures. The facility policy Nail Care-Fingernails revised on 6/2002 documented resident fingernail care was to be done at least weekly and as needed by a nursing assistant under the direction of a licensed registered nurse (RN)/licensed…
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 · E2022-04-04 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to assess residents for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation, review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident representative and obtain informed consent for 8 of 11 residents (Residents #34, 41, 47, 54, 115, 128, 140 and 174) reviewed. Specifically, - Resident #54 became entrapped in a bed rail and sustained a fracture as a result. Resident #54's bed rails were not reassessed timely after the incident to determine their continued use and safety. The bed rails were not removed timely after it was determined they were no longer needed. - Resident #34 was physically compromised and was not appropriately assessed for use of bed rails. The resident was totally dependent for bed mobility and was unable to use bed rails independently and the bed rail evaluation tool was not correctly completed. - Resident #41's and 174's comprehensive care plans did not include the use of bed rails. - For Residents #115, 140 and 174…
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 · D2022-04-04 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed to determine ability to safely self-administer medication when clinically appropriate for 1 of 1 resident (Residents #116) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #116 had an inhaler (hand-held, portable devices that deliver medication to the lungs) at their bedside and there were no physician order for self-medication administration and/or resident assessments to determine ability to safely self-administer medications. Findings include: The facility policy Self- Administering of Medications dated 5/8/2015, documents residents are assessed and evaluated upon admission, and if found capable, may self-administer medications. The interdisciplinary team will meet and complete assessment form to decide to trial a resident for self-administration of medications. The resident medication administration record (MAR) will be labeled to identify the resident as self-medicating. Resident #116 was admitted with diagnoses including chronic…
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 · D2022-04-04 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00268244) surveys conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice for 6 of 6 residents (Residents #11, 41, 47, 54, 67 and 77) reviewed for choices. Specifically, Residents #11 and 47 were administered a medication during their normal sleeping hours without consideration of their preferences; Residents #41 and 67 were not offered their preferred food or drink; and Residents #54 and 77 were not provided haircuts per their preference. Findings include: The facility policy titled Food Preferences dated 5/2012 documented every resident upon admission will be asked to list their food preferences. The purpose of the policy is to help maintain a caring, home-like atmosphere. Each resident should have the alternate and substitute policy explained. The facility policy titled Dispensing Times dated 3/2021 documented the facility was to ensure…
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 · D2022-04-04 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
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 abbreviated surveys (NY00284523) conducted [DATE]-[DATE], the facility failed to ensure conveyance, within 30 days of death, the resident's funds, and a final accounting of those funds, to the individual or probate jurisdiction administering the resident's estate, in accordance with State law for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #182) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #182 expired in the facility and disbursement or final accounting of the resident's funds was not sent to the resident's representative within 30 days of their death. Findings Include: Resident #182 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including neoplasm stromal tumor (formation of abnormal cells) and major depression. The [DATE] Minimum Data Set (MDS) discharge assessment documented the resident had expired in the facility on [DATE]. The resident statement for final accounting in the facility billing system documented the resident had expired on [DATE] and there was no disbursement…
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 · D2022-04-04 · 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
Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to ensure that all allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment were reported immediately but no later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury or not later than 24 hours if the events did not involve abuse and did not result in serious bodily injury, to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #54) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #54 was entrapped in a bed rail and sustained a fractured anatomic neck of the left humerus (upper arm bone where it meets the shoulder) and the incident was not reported to the NYSDOH as required. Findings include: The facility policy Resident, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Prevention & Reporting revised 11/2017 documented once a facility/staff member has reasonable cause to believe a violation of abuse, mistreatment, neglect, injuries of unknown origin or misappropriation of resident property has…
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 · D2022-04-04 · 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
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification survey conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse, exploitation, or mistreatment were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #140) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #140 had a fall and the resident's care plan was not reviewed to determine if the care plan was followed. Findings include: The facility policy Incident/Accidents Reporting, Investigating and Implementing Corrective Action dated 10/2017, documents it is the policy of the facility to promptly investigate any incident/accident and initiate measures to prevent reoccurrence. Any incident or accident resulting in bodily injury will be reported immediately to the Director of Nursing (DON)/Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) who, in turn, will report to the Administrator. Resident #140 had diagnoses including history of falls, dementia with behaviors, and restlessness and agitation. The 2/2/22 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment; exhibited 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 · D2022-04-04 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review during the recertification survey conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion (ROM) received appropriate treatment and services to increase ROM and/or prevent further decrease in ROM for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #54) reviewed. Specifically, use of a palm guard (used for hand contractures) was not addressed in Resident #54's comprehensive care plan (CCP) and care instructions to ensure staff applied the palm guard. Additionally, when the palm guard was not available, therapy was not notified to provide a replacement. Findings include: The facility policy Activities of Daily Living (ADL) revised 9/2009 documents the certified nurse aides (CNAs) will assist or provide ADLs according to individual resident needs according to specific care procedures. The policy was to help maintain the residents' highest level of functional ability. ADLs were to be performed following resident care plan after completion by Nurse Manager and Rehabilitation Department. Resident #54 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 · Dcited before2022-04-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated surveys (NY00277226. NY00293036, NY00263802) conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #4) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #4's care plan for falls was not followed and the resident had a fall with injury. Findings include: The facility Fall Risk Assessment dated 4/14 documents general interventions for fall prevention and injury reduction will be implemented for all residents. Staff are to ensure shoes fit properly with non-skid soles, and ensure non-skid slippers are available. Staff are to supervise resident use of devices until safe and appropriate use is demonstrated and review all activity/mobility privileges with resident. The facility policy Resident Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Prevention & Reporting dated 11/17 documents incident investigations are to include an explanation of the evidence reviewed,…
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 · D2022-04-04 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey conducted 3/28/22-4/4/22, the facility failed to develop and implement appropriate plans of action to identify quality deficiencies after an incident involving bed rail entrapment for Resident #54 (see F 700 Bed Rails). Specifically, Resident #54 became entrapped in a bed rail resulting in a fracture and a plan of action was not implemented to include review of residents with bed rails in place to ensure accurate and current assessments were completed. Findings include: The facility policy Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Plan (QAPI) revised 1/2022, documents: - The QAPI committee will meet monthly but no less than on a quarterly basis. The Standing Agenda includes the Risk Management Report, which includes falls and other incidents, including unknown etiology. - Monthly audits of high-risk clinical areas include falls prevention and abuse prevention. - A daily morning report is conducted Monday through Friday to improve internal communication and care to the residents. Significant medical events…
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 · D2019-08-22 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents were free from physical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience, and not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #31) reviewed for restraints. Specifically, Resident #31 had a wheelchair brake applied at meal times to prevent the resident from leaving the table and the resident was not able to release it independently. Findings Include: The 8/2004 Physical Restraints facility policy defined a restraint as any physical or mechanical device attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the resident cannot easily remove which restricts freedom of movement. A locked wheelchair was listed in the examples of a restraint. Restraints were only to be used after assessment by the interdisciplinary team (IDT), with a physician order, and never to be used as a substitute for appropriate observation and monitoring. Resident #31 was admitted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-08-22 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #49) reviewed for hospice and end of life care. Specifically, Resident #49's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment incorrectly identified the resident as receiving hospice services (medical services to help with terminal illness) when she was not. Findings include: The facility policy MDS 3.0 Assessments revised 8/2019 documented the interdisciplinary team was assigned specific sections of the MDS assessment to ensure the most appropriate discipline member documented accurate information regarding the resident's status. Section O was the area to mark for a resident's hospice status, which was to be documented by the nurse manager. Resident #49 was admitted to the facility from the hospital on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic pain and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The 12/25/18 admission MDS documented the resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-08-22 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interview, and record review during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure residents were provided care and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living (ADLs) including dining/eating for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #87) reviewed for ADLs. Specifically, Resident #87 was care planned for assistance at meals and was not assisted timely. Findings include: 1) Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including anemia, Vitamin D deficiency, and right eye injury. The 6/28/19 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment and did not exhibit any behavioral symptoms or rejection of care. The resident required supervision and physical assistance of one person for eating. The comprehensive care plan (CCP) last reviewed 4/1/19 documented the resident required assistance with ADLs related to decreased mobility and cognition and needed set-up assistance and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-08-22 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and observation during the recertification survey the facility did not provide proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain vision for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #148) reviewed for vision/hearing. Specifically, Resident #148 did not receive new eyeglasses as recommended by her optometrist. Findings include: The facility policy, Consults, revised 11/2010, documented nursing staff would review the consultation report for any recommendations/follow-up and would date and initial the report when it was called to the provider. Resident #148 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including anxiety disorder and corneal ulcer of the right eye. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and did not wear corrective lenses. The annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had intact cognition and did not wear corrective lenses. The Resident Profile (care instructions), with 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 before2019-08-22 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the provision of food and drink was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 2 of 3 meal trays tested during dining observations. Specifically, food was not served at palatable and safe temperatures. Findings include: The kitchen policy titled Hot Food Policy dated 12/2017, documents dietary will serve all hot foods at 135 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The kitchen policy titled Cold Food Policy undated, documents cold food will be delivered to the resident at 40 F or below. The kitchen form titled Food and Nutrition Services Test Tray Evaluation undated, documented hot beverages temperature range of 140 F or above. The kitchen form titled Dietary Department Service Line Temperatures dated 8/19/2019 for the 2nd floor documented the hall meal tray assembly started at 4:50 PM and was completed at 5:19 PM. The following observations were made: - On 8/19/19 at 5:18 PM, the hall carts arrived on the 2nd floor C unit on an uninsulated rolling rack. At 5:23…
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 before2019-08-22 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 observation and interview during the recertification survey, the facility did not store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 main kitchen reach-in coolers. Specifically, the cooler had non-potable condensation dripping from the top of the cooler and there was a container of egg salad with a cracked lid exposing the egg salad to open air. Findings include: The facility policy titled Perishable Foods Policy dated 12/2017, documents all food should be securely covered, dated, and labeled. During the follow-up kitchen visit on 8/21/19 at 6:39 AM, 1 reach-in cooler was observed to have non-potable condensation dripping from top of the cooler. The following was observed inside of the cooler: - 1 container of ranch dressing had standing water on the lid; and - 1 container of egg salad was covered with a cracked lid, which left the food exposed to open air. During an interview with the Assistant Food Service Director on 8/21/19 at 7:29 AM stated there was a sheet pan in the cooler to catch the dripping water and the pan should be changed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to UPSTATE SERVICES GROUP — 17 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 2.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
The other 16 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KOENIG, URI | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 60% | since 12/22/2010 |
| STEIF, EFRAIM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 40% | since 08/15/2017 |
| BHOOMIREDDI, MADHUKAR | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/05/2008 |
| ANDERSON, NATHAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 05/24/2021 |
| AUGENSTEIN, JACK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/19/2016 |
| WUERTZER, AMY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/14/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $4.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 335226. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-07-26, 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.