Sapphire Nursing At Wappingers
37 Mesier Avenue, Wappingers Falls, NY 12590 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 62 certified beds · (845) 297-3793 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2025
- 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- 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) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 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 — 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 | 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 held steady at 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 | 10.3% | 14.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 9.8% | 5.8% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 44.8% | 19.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.7% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.8% | 12.5% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.1% | 13.2% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.0% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.0% | 6.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 34.2% | 19.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.0% | 13.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 82.6% | 78.8% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.7% | 20.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.3% | 9.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.82 | 1.70 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.93 | 1.36 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
46.7% 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 85 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 76.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 52 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 46.7%CMS range 38.6–58.0 | 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 | 9.3%CMS range 6.4–13.3 | 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 | 76.9% | 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 | 61.5% | 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 | 65.4% | 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 | 98.9% | 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 | 65.7% | 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 | 92.9% | 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 | 4.5% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 5.8%CMS range 2.7–9.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.05 | 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 62 beds and averages 56.9 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.24 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.61 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.57 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.51 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.96 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
35 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Abbreviated Survey the facility did not ensure necessary care and services were provided related to medication for one (Resident #3) of three (3) residents reviewed for quality of care. Specifically, medications were not available to be administered as ordered upon admission on [DATE]. Resident #3's medication list included Buprenorphine/Naloxone, a controlled substance used for opioid dependence treatment, anticonvulsant, neuropathic pain medication, anti-anxiety medication and antiviral medications. Pharmacy delivery records provided by the facility documented medications for Resident #3 were delivered to the facility between 11/03/2025 through 11/07/2025. There was no documented evidence that the pharmacy was contacted by facility staff when Resident #3 medications were not available. There was no documented evidence of physician notification or continuous follow-up related to unavailable medications and missed doses. The Findings…
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 · E2026-05-07 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews conducted during an Abbreviated Survey, the facility did not ensure that a dietitian or other clinically qualified professional was sufficiently involved in carrying out the functions of the food and nutrition services. Specifically, the facility began a project to renovate the kitchen which temporarily prevents the facility from using the kitchen to cook resident meals. As an alternative, the facility is using an outside food vendor(a local restaurant) to provide resident meals, but the arrangement is without a system that provides dietitian oversight of meal preparation and consistently ensures that meals meet the daily nutritional, therapeutic, and other special dietary needs of the residents. Kitchen renovation project began in 2025. The use of the outside vendor began 02/02/2026. The facility did not provide a contract with the Food vendor(local restaurant).On 03/30/2026 at 12:11 PM, during a tour of the kitchen in the facility basement, the surveyor observed meals obtained from an outside vendor being plated for resident…
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 before2026-05-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 the Abbreviated Survey, the facility did not ensure food was procured, distributed, and served under sanitary conditions and at safe temperatures. Specifically, the surveyor observed the facility plating lunch meals on 03/30/2026. Hot foods were not maintained at safe temperatures during holding, as evidenced by temperatures declining below 135 F during continued plating. A test tray performed at the completion of meal service at 1:07pm on 03/30/2026 showed hot food items were not maintained at safe temperatures and were below acceptable ranges. The findings included: On 03/30/2026 at 12:11 PM, the surveyor arrived at the kitchen located in the basement of the facility and in the presence of the Food Service Director, observed [NAME] #1 plating the residents food for lunch. [NAME] #1 was observed as the only staff plating the food. The surveyor observed food items including Salisbury steak, mixed vegetables, baked potatoes, mashed potatoes, pureed chicken, pureed vegetables, and ground meat. The food was observed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00373412, NY00374723), the facility did not ensure residents were free from abuse for 3 out of 3 residents (Resident #1, Resident # 2, Resident # 6) reviewed for abuse. Specifically, 1) On 2/26/2025 Resident #1 who had a known history of wandering, wandered into Resident # 2's room and Resident # 2 became agitated and put their hands on Resident # 1. Resident # 1 fell to the floor and kicked Resident # 2 in the leg. Resident #1 had no behavior care plan initiated before the incident. 2) On 3/11/2025 Resident # 1 was observed by staff in the doorway of their room holding their roommate(Resident # 6) by the collar. There was no documented behavior care plan was not initiated for Resident # 1 who had a known previous history of resident to resident altercation.The findings are:A review of the facility's Abuse investigation protocol/ Resident to Resident abuse policy last reviewed 5/2/2024 documented it is the policy of the facility to conduct 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 · E2025-07-08 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure 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 record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00360874), the facility did not ensure 1 out of 3 (Resident # 7) residents were free from significant medication errors. Specifically, Resident # 7 did not receive their physician ordered medication Enoxaparin Sodium (a medication to prevent blood clots) from 11/6/2024-11/12/2024. There were omissions on the Medication Administration Record with no documented nursing notes as to why the medications were not administered. 2) Resident #7 did not receive their medication Diazepam (a central nervous system depressant) from 11/6/2024-11/12/2024 as ordered by the physician. There was no documentation that the physician was notified or reasons why the medications were not administered. Resident #7 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] for change in mental status. The findings are:The facility Medication Administration Policy and Procedure dated 9/1/2024 documented it is the policy of the facility to ensure that Medication Administration 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 · D2025-07-08 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview during the abbreviated survey, (NY00340966), the facility did not ensure all allegations were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 4 residents. Specifically, Resident # 3 complained of pain in the shoulder and had x ray done on 4/26/2024 that showed a displaced right scapular fracture and osteopenia and was transferred to the hospital on 4/26/2024. The hospital history and physical report documented the resident reported that while in the facility when they were being repositioned, they heard a pop in their right shoulder. The facility did not provide any incident and accident report of the incident when requested by surveyors.The findings are: Resident #3 was re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that include but not limited to Parkinson's Disease, Functional Quadriplegia, and Acute Kidney Failure.A quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status Score a 15; indicating the resident was cognitively intact with no behaviors. Resident had…
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 before2024-09-03 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews during an abbreviated survey (NY00342534) the facility did not ensure residents right to be free from abuse for 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 8/5/2024 Resident #2 who was known to be physically/verbally abusive wandered into Resident #1's room, threw their items on the floor, tried to take away their walker and punched them with a closed fist on their arm. Resident #1 reported they were punched on the right arm by Resident #2. Resident #1 was assessed with no injuries and Resident #2 was discharged to the hospital for further evaluation. Findings include: The facility abuse, neglect and exploitation of resident's policy dated 7/12/2018 and last reviewed/revised 4/2020 documented it is the policy of the facility that acts of physical, verbal, and mental abuse directed against residents are absolutely prohibited. Each resident has the right to be free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse. Residents will not be subjected to…
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 before2024-04-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 observations, record review and interviews during a recertification survey 4/8/24-4/17/24, the facility did not ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of quality for 4 of 6 residents (Residents #14, #27, #54 and #56) reviewed for quality of care. Specifically, 1) Resident #14 vascular wound dressing was not changed daily as ordered and was observed on 4/12/24 with a date of 4/9/24 on the dressing. 2) Resident #54 did not have post hospitalization appointments scheduled for follow up care. 3) Resident #56's order for compression stockings was not carried out and a follow up urology appointment was not scheduled. 4) Resident #27 did not receive daily wound care as ordered on 8 of 19 days from 3/29/24 to 4/16/24. Findings include: 1) Resident #14 was admitted with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive, venous insufficiency, and hypothyroidism. Resident #14's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 3/23/24 documented the resident had moderate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-17 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated surveys (NY0322448, NY00308142 and NY00320376) from 4/08/24 to 4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that there was sufficient nursing staff to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Specifically, upon review of the staffing schedule for multiple days and on all three shifts of staffing for each unit, the facility did not provide adequate staffing to meet the needs of the residents. The findings are: Review of the facility policy titled Staffing, Sufficient and Competent Nursing dated 11/2/18 documented that out facility provides sufficient numbers of nursing staff with the appropriate skills and competency necessary to provide nursing and related care and services for all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment. Review of the Facility-Wide assessment dated [DATE], and reviewed by the Quality Assurance Agency/Quality…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-17 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey conducted from 4/08/24 to 4/17/24, the facility did not ensure certified nurse aide performance reviews were completed at least once every 12 months for 5 of 5 (Staff #'s 8, 9, 16, 17, and 18) certified nurse aides reviewed. The findings are: There was no documented evidence that Staff #8, 9, 16, 17, and 18 had performance reviews completed at least once every 12 months. During an interview on 04/11/24 at 03:35 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing stated that they became employed by the facility on 2/28/23 and became the staff educator in September 2023. The Assistant Director of Nursing stated certified nurse aide performance reviews had not been done prior to and since they became employed at the facility; and staff competencies should be done every 12 months and as needed. During an interview on 04/11/24 at 03:40 PM, the Director of Nursing stated that certified nurse aide performance reviews had not been done and should have been done. The Director of Nursing stated that staff performance 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.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 conducted during the recertification survey from 4/8/2024-4/17/2024, the facility did not ensure that sanitary conditions were being maintained in the main kitchen area. Specifically, 1) undated and unlabeled food were in the freezer; 2) the dishwasher was not reaching the appropriate temperature; 3) staff were storing personal food in the refrigerator used for the residents' meals; 4) the exhaust wall fan was covered with dust and grease debris; 5) staff were not wearing beard cover while serving the residents their meals; and 6) tuna fish in a stainless steel container and lettuce were on the same shelf in the refrigerator. The findings include: The facility policy entitled Food Receiving And Storage Issued 6/26/2018 stated food services, or other designed staff, will always maintain clean food storage areas. All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled, and dated (use by date). Uncooked and raw animal products and fish will be stored separately in drip proof containers and below fruits, vegetables 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 · Ecited before2024-04-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during a recertification survey from 4/8/24-4/17/24, the facility did not ensure infection control prevention practices were maintained to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 5 of 5 residents (#22, #8, #14, #56, and #18) reviewed for infection control. Specifically, 1) staff did not change gloves after touching a resident and/or assistive device and before handing out Resident #8's food tray and staff were observed using the same hand while feeding Resident #22 and Resident #8; 2) staff did not wear a gown during a dressing change for Resident #14 on Enhanced Barrier Precautions; 3) staff did not wear a gown during a treatment for Resident #56 on Enhanced Barrier Precautions and 4) there was no documentation that oxygen tubing was changed weekly and as needed for Resident #18. The findings are: The facility policy for Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 3/21/24 documented the program was 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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview during a recertification survey 4/8/24-4/17/24, the facility did not ensure residents had the right to a dignified existence for 8 of 8 residents reviewed for dining (Residents #54, #40, #39, #19, #25, #49, #56 and #28). Specifically, 1)clothing protectors were applied to Resident # 54, #40, #39, #19, #25, and #49 without first obtaining the residents permission; and 2) staff were observed standing over Resident #56 and #28 while feeding the residents their lunch. Findings include: The facility policy titled Resident Rights dated 2/27/18 documented all residents will be treated with kindness, respect, and dignity. The facility policy titled Preparing Resident for Meal dated 8/30/18 documented to inquire if the resident would like to wear a clothing protector in order to prevent spills of food items from staining clothes. 1. Resident #54 had diagnoses of atrial fibrillation, cerebrovascular accident, and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). The 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 · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 4/08/24 to 4/17/24, it was determined for 1 of 1 resident (Resident # 11) reviewed for personal property, the facility did not ensure grievances were resolved in a timely manner. Specifically, the facility lacked documentation that a thorough investigation was completed or that there was timely resolution after Resident #11's report of missing clothing. The findings are: The facility Policy and Procedure titled Investigation of Grievance/concerns reviewed 11/20/23 documented that the facility would complete a prompt, thorough investigation of all grievances. Resident #11 was admitted with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bipolar disorder, and atrial fibrillation. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS an assessment tool) dated 3/5/2024 documented the resident was cognitively intact and had continuous behaviors. The social work progress note dated 3/27/2024 documented they would look into the resident's missing clothes. There was no documented evidence that a grievance…
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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and record review during the recertification survey conducted from 4/8/2024-4/17/2024 the facility did not ensure that required documentation was sent to the receiving provider at the time of a hospital transfer for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #54) reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that a transfer summary was completed/sent when Resident #54 was transferred to the hospital. The findings are: Policy and Procedure dated 11/1/2017 titled Admission/Discharge/Transfer documented: when a resident is transferred or discharged , details of the transfer or discharge will be documented in the medical record and appropriate information will be communicated to the receiving health care facility or provider. Resident #54 was admitted with diagnoses which include history of cerebral vascular accident, dysphagia, and seizures. The 5 Day Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 2/25/2024 documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition. The nursing progress note dated 2/17/2024 documented the family requested that 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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview during a recertification survey conducted from 4/8/2024-4/17/2024 the facility did not ensure that they provided written notice of the facility's Bed Hold policy upon transfer to all residents or residents' representative(s) for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #54) reviewed for hospitalization. Specifically, Resident #54 and/or their representatives were not provided written notice of the bed hold upon discharge to the hospital. The findings are: The Policy and Procedure dated 11/12/2019 and titled Bed Hold documented: The facility will notify the designated representative and / or the resident of the facility's bed reservation policies, in writing, at the time of admission and at the time of transfer. Resident #54 had Diagnosis's of cerebral vascular accident, dysphagia, and seizures. The 5 Day Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) dated 2/25/2024 documented the resident had moderately impaired cognition. The nursing progress note dated 2/17/2024 documented the family requested that the resident be sent to the hospital. The nursing progress note…
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 · D2024-04-17 · 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
Based on observation, record review and interview conducted during a recertification 4/8/24-4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that necessary assistance and care were provided to carry out activities of daily living for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (Resident #52). Specifically, Resident #52 was not toileted timely after calling for assistance. The findings are: Resident #52 was admitted on with diagnoses including Type II Diabetes Mellitus, and Major Depressive Disorder. The Annual Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment and screening tool) dated 1/14/24 documented the resident was cognitively intact and required moderate staff assistance for walking and toilet use and was always continent of bowel and occasionally incontinent of urine. The care plan for Activities of Daily Living initiated on 1/7/24 had interventions that included toilet every 2-4 hours and as needed. The care plan for incontinent care dated 1/7/24 documented the resident would be free from skin breaks, free from psycho social complications including withdrawal, embarrassment,…
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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 4/8/2024-4/17/2024, the facility did not ensure all residents were provided an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities and designed to meet their individual needs based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #50) reviewed for activities. Specifically, Resident #50 did not have an admission activity assessment completed to assess for and provide meaningful activities. Findings include: A review of the policy and procedure titled Activities dated 2/4/2019 documented the activities programs are staffed with personnel who have appropriate training and experience to meet the needs and interests of each resident. Resident #50 was admitted with diagnoses including diabetes, end stage renal disease, and anxiety disorder. The activities care plan dated 12/7/2023 documented the resident was on contact isolation for clostridium difficile (C. diff, bacterial infection of bowel) and required in room…
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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such 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 interview conducted during the recertification survey from 4/8/24-4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that pain management was consistently provided for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for pain (Resident #56 and #43). Specifically, 1) Resident #56 did not receive Lidocaine patches as ordered and was not provided monitoring of their pain level to determine the need for an alternate treatment; and 2) Resident #43's pain level was not monitored. The findings are: A review of the policy and procedure titled Pain dated 5/25/2018, documented the staff will reassess the individuals pain and related consequences at regular intervals; at least each shift for acute pain or significant changes in levels of chronic pain. 1) Resident #56 was admitted with diagnoses including quadriplegia after fall with a neck fracture, neurogenic bladder, and subluxation (partial dislocation) of the shoulder. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented the resident was cognitively intact and had…
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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey conducted from 4/08/24 to 4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that they consistently posted the daily nurse staffing information (daily resident census, total number/ actual hours worked by licensed nurses and certified nurse aides, and specific units) to be readily accessible to residents and visitors. Specifically, the daily nursing staff information was posted in the lobby area of the building on the other side of a coded door that the residents were unable to unlock unless accompanied by staff. Furthermore, the daily nursing staff information was not updated to reflect any staffing changes throughout the day and the specific units were not reflected on the posting. The findings are: On 04/09/24 at 9:20 AM, upon entering the lobby of the building the daily nurse staffing information was posted and not easily accessible to residents due to needing a code to unlock the door that led to the lobby area. Additionally, the specific units were not reflected on the posting. On 04/11/24 at 5:08 PM, 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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey from 4/08/24 to 4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that the Facility Assessment was reviewed, accurate and updated as necessary. Specifically, the education, training, and competencies required for the certified nurse aides on the Facility Assessment were out of their scope of practice. The findings are: The Facility Profile dated 2/21/24 and last reviewed with the Quality Assurance Agency/Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement committee on 3/20/24 documented the certified nurse aides had training and competencies in glucometers, medication administration, gastronomy tube placement, ventilation/tracheostomy, aseptic dressings, electrocardiograms, and Pleural catheters. During an interview on 04/12/24 at 12:15 PM, the Administrator stated the Facility Assessment was accurate and it was reviewed recently with the Quality Assurance Agency/Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement committee. During an interview on 04/12/24 at 12:20 PM, the Director of Nursing stated that the Facility Assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-17 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review, and interview conducted during a recertification survey from 4/8/2024-4/17/2024, the facility did not implement an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. Specifically, the facility was unable to provide a February or March 2024 infection/antibiotic tracking report. The findings are: There was no documented evidence for an infection and antibiotic tracking report for February and March 2024. During an interview on 4/15/24 at 12:00 PM the Infection Control Practitioner stated the facility was a little behind in reviewing, the tracking and antibiotic stewardship. They stated the last one reviewed was in January 2024. During an interview on 4/15/24 at 12:16 PM the Administrator stated that the infection control nurse was responsible for the antibiotic stewardship. The Administrator stated they were unaware that the facility was behind in infection control tracking and antibiotic stewardship. 10 NYCRR 415.19 (a)(1,3)
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-17 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview conducted during the recertification survey from 4/8/24-4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that residents were provided a safe, sanitary, and comfortable home-like environment. Specifically, 1. there was a strong urine odor in Resident #33 and 36's shared room and 2. the window curtain in Resident #25's room was hanging off the rod. The findings including: The facility policy entitled: Cleaning and Disinfecting Rooms Revised 11/12/2019. The facility policy stated environment surfaces will be disinfected on a regular basis, three times per week and when surfaces are visibly soiled. Clean curtains, window blinds, and walls when they are visibly soiled or dusty. Conduct monthly spot checks to ensure that all curtains and window treatments are cleaned and orderly. During an interview on 4/8/24 at 10:35 AM, Resident #33 stated everything was broken in the facility. At that time there was a strong urine odor inside the room. During an observation on 4/9/24 at 12:47 PM, and 4/10/24 at 9:35 AM Resident #25's window curtain was ripped, hanging down 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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview conducted during the recertification and abbreviated survey (NY00315011) conducted from 4/08/24 to 4/17/24, the facility did not ensure that the written description of the facility policy to implement advance directives was followed for one of one residents (Resident #0) of reviewed for Advance Directives. Specifically, cardiopulmonary resuscitation was administered and the resident was not sent to the hospital as per request for Resident #0 with orders for Do Not Resuscitate and orders to send to the hospital if necessary. The finding are: The facility policy titled Advanced Directives dated 5/4/18, documented the facility will honor the wishes of the resident/representative regarding medical concern, by honoring the existing advanced directives of the resident as well as offering the resident/representative the opportunity to make changes to existing advanced directives. Resident #0 was admitted with diagnoses including acute sepsis, acute hyperkalemia, and altered mental…
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 · E2023-10-31 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely 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 reviews and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00306613, NY00323689), the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, including injuries of unknown source are reported immediately but no later than 2 hours, and the submission of the investigative report to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) within 5 working days. This was evident in 2 of 4 residents (Residents #1 & #2) reviewed for Abuse. Specifically, (1) the facility reported a staff to Resident #1 abuse to the NYSDOH on 12/08/2022. The facility did not submit the required 5-day investigative report until 12/23/2022; (2) Resident #2 was observed with a bump on the left side of forehead measuring 8 cm x 6 cm (3.15 inches x 2.4 inches) and bruising to the left upper extremity measuring 18 cm x 10 cm (7 inches x 3.9 inches) on 09/11/2023 at 12 PM. The facility reported to the NYSDOH on 09/12/2023 at 8:30 AM. The findings are: The Facility Policy entitled Abuse Prohibition Program revised on 11/01/2019 documented that all alleged violations and results…
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 · D2023-10-31 · 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 interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00313016), the facility did not to ensure that the Family Representative (RR) of 1 of 4 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for notification was promptly informed of a change in the resident's physical status. Specifically, (1) Resident #3 had a room change for Covid isolation on 12/23/2022 and the family became aware when they visited the resident two days later; (2) Resident #'s RR was not notified when their right heel scab opened on 03/09/2023 new treatments were initiated. The findings are: The Facility Policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status dated 06/01/2017 documented that if there is a significant change in the resident room or roommate assignment and a significant change that will not normally resolve itself without intervention by staff or by implementing standard disease-related clinical interventions, the family/family representative are to be notified within 24 hours. Resident #3 had diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of the prostate, morbid obesity, and Diabetic…
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 before2023-10-31 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00313016), the facility did not ensure prompt efforts were made to resolve a resident's grievance. This was evident for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for Grievance. Specifically, (1) Resident #3's Family Representative (FR) complained to the facility on [DATE] that they were not notified about the presence of a right heel wound and that the scheduled wound dressing changes were not rendered but there was no documented evidence that the complaint was addressed; (2) there was also no evidence that a grievance form was initiated and completed for the residents' concerns in accordance with the facility policy. The Findings are: A review of the undated facility policy titled Investigation of grievance concerns documented the facility will complete a prompt, thorough investigation of all grievances and/ or concerns filed with the facility. Concerns may include but are not limited to care issues, issues of alleged discrimination,…
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 before2023-10-31 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00306613), the facility did not ensure that 1 out of 4 sampled residents (Resident #1) was free from physical, verbal, and emotional abuse. Specifically review of facility surveillance camera with no audio dated 12/06/2022 at 12AM revealed Resident #1 striking Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA #1) on the right shoulder as they sat in the day room. CNA #1 quickly stood up and with an intimidating stance, spoke and gestured for Resident #1 to return to their room. Resident #1 was observed cowering but did not leave. CNA #1 then physically turned and pushed Resident #1's upper back for the resident to return to their room. CNA #1 was observed grabbing Resident #1's right arm, but the resident was able to move their arm away. This incident was also witnessed by CNA #2 on the video footage. CNA #2 did not stop the interaction between Resident #1 and CNA #1 and did not report the incident to the administration. The findings are: The Facility Policy entitled Abuse Prohibition Program revised on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-17 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during the recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the interdisciplinary team (IDT) determine if a significant change assessment was warranted in the required 14-day period after a decline was identified for a resident who decline in functional status. Specifically, 1 of 1 resident (Resident # 9) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) had a functional decline in 2 or more areas based on 2 comparative Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment instrument); 2 a significant change MDS was not done within the required 14-day period after the decline was identified in order to determine appropriate plan of care and treatment. The findings are: Resident # 9 has diagnoses and conditions not limited to Diabetes Mellitus, Major Depression, and Dementia. According to the 3/20/19 Annual MDS, the resident had severe impaired cognition, and required extensive assistance of one person with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, personal/oral…
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 · D2020-01-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during the recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that care plans with measurable goals, time frames and interventions were developed to address each resident's medical care needs. Specifically, care plans had not been developed to address issues related to: (1) multiple medical diagnoses with prescribed medications (Resident #53), (2) pain management for a resident with a spinal fracture (Resident #46), and ( 3) medical diagnoses of cirrhosis of the liver and hypothyroidism (Resident #37). The findings are: 1. Resident #53 was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia, Hypertension, and Depression. The 1/2/20 Significant Change MDS (Minimum Data Set: an assessment tool) revealed that resident #53 received 7 days of antidepressant and anticoagulant medicatoin and 1 day of antibiotic therapy. The January 2020 Physician's orders included but were not limited to the following medications: Namenda 5mg daily, Lexapro 10mg daily,…
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 · D2020-01-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview conducted during the recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure care plans were reviewed and revised to address issues related to smoking and anxiety. Specifically, no interventions were initiated to address non-compliance with the facility's no smoking policy (Resident #2). and the plan of care addressing anxiety was not evaluated to address the continued use of 3 psychoactive medications (Resident #23). The findings are: 1. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis including Chronic Renal Failure and Type II Diabetes. The physician's orders indicated the resident receives hemodialysis three times weekly off site. Based on admission MDS The resident is cognitively intact, can make needs known and self-propels in a wheelchair. An Accident/Incident report from 1/6/20 7:30 pm, the resident was observed on the second floor unit in a back bathroom rolling his wheelchair and smoking cigarettes. On 1/7/20 morning the resident was once again found on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-17 · 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 observation, interview and record review conducted during a recent recertification survey, the facility did not provide the necessary care and devices needed maintain or prevent further contracture for 1 resident (Resident # 41) reviewed for limited range of motion. The findings are: Resident #41 has current diagnoses and conditions including but not limited to Generalized Muscle Weakness, Spasm, and Contracture of Upper and Lower Extremity. According to the 12/5/19 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS; an assessment instrument), the resident had severe impaired cognition, and was totally dependent on staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) (e.g. bathing, dressing, grooming etc.) A Splint/Cast/Brace/Immobilizer Care Plan initiated 9/19/19 and in effect at the time of the review documented the resident uses splints to both hands for contracture. The current physician orders in effect at the time of the review had orders for bilateral hand splints daily, to be applied in the AM, and taken off at hours of sleep. The resident was observed lying in bed on 1/14/20 at 10:33 AM…
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 · D2020-01-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review conducted during the most recent re-certification survey, the facility did not ensure that 1 of 1 resident reviewed for respiratory care was provided appropriate care consistent with standards of practice and in accordance with a written plan of care. Specifically, the resident was being administered 3 liters of oxygen not in accordance with the physician's orders or written plan of care. The findings are. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Anxiety Disorder. On 1/14/20 at 8:45 AM the resident was observed receiving oxygen at about 2.5 Liters via a nasal cannula. The resident was observed receiving 3 liters of oxygen at other times when out of bed to include: 1/14/20 at 11:20 AM, 1/16/20 at 11:13 AM and 1/16/20 at 12:38 PM . However, according to the physician's order, the resident was to be administered 3 liters of oxygen via a BiPAP machine…
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 · D2020-01-17 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 record review and interview conducted during the most recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary medications used for pain management and the treatment of hypertension. This was evident for 2 of 5 resident's reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #37 and #23) and 1 of 2 resident's reviewed for pain management (Resident #49). Specifically, there was inadequate pain monitoring for the use of opioids for Residents #37 and #49) and inadequate monitoring of vital signs for the use of an antihypertensive medication (Resident #23). The findings are: 1. Resident #37 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Chronic Hepatitis C, Cancer, Cirrhosis of the liver, Depression and Hypothyroidism. The resident was also admitted with the history of psychoactive substance abuse. The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment instrument) dated 12/12/19 revealed that the resident had no cognitive impairment, 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 · Dcited before2020-01-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that facility staff followed proper hand hygiene to prevent cross contamination and the spread of infection for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #59) reviewed for pressure ulcer. The findings are: Resident #59 has diagnoses and conditions not limited to Acute Kidney Issues, Diabetes Mellitus, Stage 3 left heel Pressure Ulcer (PU), and Unstageable Deep Tissue Injury (DTI) PU to Right Heel. According to the 1/7/2020 5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS; an assessment tool), the resident had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 out of 15, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The MDS also noted that Resident #59 required extensive staff assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Physician's orders dated 1/7/20 had a directive to clean Resident #59's right and left heel with Normal Saline, apply Skin Prep, and leave open to air. During a wound observation conducted on 1/16/20 at 11:26AM on the South side unit, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN…
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 SAPPHIRE CARE GROUP — 8 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 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABRAMCZYK, MACHLA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 04/26/2017 |
| FARKOWITZ, ESTHER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 33% | since 04/26/2017 |
| PLATSCHEK, RICHARD | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 33% | since 04/26/2017 |
| SCHUCK, ROBERT | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 13% | since 04/26/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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.
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 335275. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-04-17, 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.