Wyoming County Community Hospitals SNF

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

46.9% 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 97 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 30.0% 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 40 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 138 beds and averages 133.7 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.29 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.67 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.54 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor 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

  Based on interview and record review conducted during a Complaint investigation (#NY00325918) during a Standard survey completed on 3/1/24, the facility did not ensure that a resident has the right to refuse treatment for one (Resident #114) of two residents reviewed for choices. Specifically, Resident #114's Health Care Proxy did not give consent for an influenza vaccine, and the resident received it. The finding is: Review of the policy and procedure titled Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccination dated 6/28/21 revealed that all residents having capacity to make health care decisions, and all legal representatives of residents lacking capacity to make health care decisions will be educated regarding the risks and benefits of receiving these vaccinations utilizing the What You Need to Know vaccine information sheets from the CDC. (The influenza information sheet is updated yearly.) In the event the resident or legal representative declines these vaccines, a declination form indicating the reason declined will be completed and filed in the permanent record. Resident #114 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during a Standard survey completed on 3/1/24, the facility did not ensure that each resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene for two (Residents #22 and #88) of four residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #22 had thick dark debris under their fingernails and was observed on multiple occasions to eat their meals with their fingers; Resident #88 had long, jagged fingernails with dark debris underneath. Additionally, staff did not provide nail care for Resident #88 when they requested it. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Bath Routine dated 5/27/2021 documented the bath routine included a shampoo, body cleansing and nail care. 1. Resident #22 had diagnoses that included dementia, fibromyalgia (a chronic disorder that causes pain throughout the body), and depression. The Minimum Data Set ( a resident assessment tool) dated 12/27/23 documented…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during a Standard survey completed on 3/1/24, the facility did not ensure that appropriate treatment and services were provided to prevent urinary tract infection (UTI) for a resident with a suprapubic urinary catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder, through the abdomen, to drain urine) for one (Resident #40) of one resident reviewed. Specifically, Resident #40 had a history of urinary tract infections and was observed on several occasions with the urinary catheter drainage bag, catheter drainage port, and catheter tubing lying directly on the floor in the resident's room. The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Catheter Care - Foley/Suprapubic Urinary Drainage Bag - Emptying dated 1/13/22 documented catheter care is performed with am/pm care and as needed to prevent potential complications that can arise from the presence of an indwelling catheter; Providing regular perineal (the area between the anus and genitalia), preventing catheter related trauma are important interventions to reduce risk of catheter…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the Standard survey completed 3/1/24, the facility did not ensure residents were assessed 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 obtained informed consent prior to the installation of bed rails for two (Resident # 88, and #100) of two residents reviewed for bed rails. Specifically, Residents #88 and #100 were not assessed for risk of entrapment from bed rails, there was no documented evidence the risks and benefits of bed rails were reviewed and that consents were obtained prior to bed rail use. The findings are: The policy and procedure, titled Bed Mobility Assistive Devices dated 9/19//2022 documented to Assess the resident for risk of entrapment from bed mobility assistive device prior to installation, review the risk and benefits with resident and resident representative-assessment will occur quarterly, annually, or 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2022-03-11 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review during the Standard survey completed on 3/11/22, the facility did not implement written policies and procedures for screening employees that would prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property. Specifically, the facility did not provide documentation that verified 16 (one Agency Registered Nurse (RN#4), seven Agency Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs #4, 8, 9,10,11,12,13), and eight Agency Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs #7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15) of 16 agency employees that worked in the facility and were subject to the New York State Nurse Aide Registry had been screened through the New York State Nurse Aide Registry prior to their first date worked at the facility. The finding is: According to the facility policy and procedure titled, Abuse Prohibition and Reporting Protocol, dated 2/24/21, all employees, volunteers, and consultants will be checked through the Nurse Aide Registry for any findings of abuse and/or neglect. Review of a list of agency staff members who actively worked at the…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-03-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review conducted during the Standard survey (Complaint #NY00283011), completed on 3/11/22, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, or mistreatment are reported immediately, but not later than 2-hours after the allegation if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency) for two (Resident #102 and Resident #39) of two residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, the facility did not report an allegation of sexual abuse between Resident #102 and Resident #39 on 9/9/21 at 11:30 PM to the New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH) as required. The findings are: The facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Abuse Prohibition and Reporting Protocol revised 2/24/21 documented all information obtained will be reviewed by Administration, to determine if there is sufficient evidence for a prudent person to believe that physical abuse, mistreatment, or…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-03-11 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review during the Standard survey completed on 3/11/22, the facility did not ensure that a resident with limited range of motion receives appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion. Specifically, one (Resident # 37) of one resident observed for position/ mobility did not have their feet supported by the foot plate of the chair, or a positioning device, while sitting in a broda (positioning chair that prevents skin breakdown) chair and the resident had a decline in measurements/ range of motion (ROM). The finding is: Facility policy and procedure titled Therapy Consults dated 10/2012 documented a guideline for therapy consult would include wheelchair positioning and/or questions regarding whether the wheelchair is properly fitted to the resident. Once a potential problem is identified an initiation of the consult can be performed by any interdisciplinary (IDT) staff member. 1. Resident #37 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0552 — isolated
  Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (#NY00233654), it was determined for one (Resident #54) of one resident reviewed for notification, the facility did not ensure that the resident and/or responsible party was informed, in advance, by the physician, Nurse Practitioner, or professional of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options, and to choose the alternative or option that he or she preferred. Specifically, the resident was prescribed and administered a narcotic medication without the resident and/or responsible party being informed. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses including dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 12/24/18, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact. A progress note, dated 2/11/18, revealed 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that for 9 (Residents #47, #49, #96, #100, #103, #115, #123, #225, and #227) of 11 residents reviewed for Baseline Care Plans, the facility did not consistently develop a thorough Baseline Care Plan within 48 hours of admission that included instructions needed to provide effective person-centered care. This is evidenced by, but not limited to, the following: Review of the facility policy, Comprehensive Assessment Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment 3.0/Care Plans, dated 6/28/17, revealed a Baseline Care Plan will be developed within 48 hours. 1. Resident #227 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including prostate cancer, bone cancer, and the use of a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line to administer an antibiotic for an infection. The MDS Assessment, dated 2/12/19, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. An Individual Resident Care Plan Develop within 48 hours of admission…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that for one of seven residents reviewed for unnecessary medications and one of three residents reviewed for tube feedings, the facility did not develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that addressed the resident's medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs. The issues involved the lack of development of a care plan for the use of an antipsychotic medication (Resident # 47), and the lack of a care plan for a resident's non-complaince with their diet order (Resident #49). This is evidenced by the following: 1. Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including superficial siderosis (a disease of the central nervous system), cerebral vascular accident with hemiplegia, and unspecified dementia without behaviors. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 12/10/18, revealed that the resident had moderately impaired cognition, no…

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

What families pay in NY