Seneca Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, LLC

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.

46.5% 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 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 32.1% 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 28 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 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 64% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% 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 120 beds and averages 67.4 residents a day — about 56% occupied, or roughly 53 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

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 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.91 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 2.64 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.67 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% 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.

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 · E2025-06-27 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor 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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (NY00371778) from 06/23/2025 to 06/27/2025, for six (6) (Residents #1, #2, #27, #35, #37 and #46) of 20 residents reviewed, the facility did not promote and treat each resident with respect and dignity in a manner and an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life. Specifically, for Residents #2, #35, and #46 staff were observed assisting residents during meals in an undignified manner. Residents #1, #27, #37 and #46 were observed eating with their hands/fingers while dropping food debris on themselves and no staff assist observed. The findings include but not limited to: The facility policy Dignity, dated February 2021, included each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect, and individuality. Residents shall be treated with respect and dignity at all times and provided with a dignified dining…

  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 · Ecited before2025-06-27 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 06/23/2025 to 06/27/2025, for 5 (Residents #1, #26, #27, #37, and #46) of 18 residents reviewed, the facility did not provide the residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living, the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. Specifically, the residents did not receive the necessary assistance with eating they required and were care planned for. The findings include but not limited to: The facility policy Assistance with Meals, dated March 2022, documented staff would serve resident trays and would help residents who required assistance with eating. Residents who cannot feed themselves would be fed with attention to safety, comfort and dignity. The facility Feeding Assistant Policy, dated April 2025, included to assist appropriate residents with feeding and hydration utilizing facility staff that had completed the New York State Paid Feeding…

  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 · D2025-06-27 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 06/23/2025 to 06/27/2025, for two (2) (B and C-units) of three (3) resident units, the facility did not provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior. Specifically, hand washing sink plumbing fixtures were not working properly to supply hot water. The findings are: During observations on 06/23/2025 at 10:58 AM, no hot water would dispense from the hand wash sink in the B-unit soiled utility room. When turning the hot water handle, no water would dispense. During an immediate interview, the Maintenance Director stated they had noticed there was no hot water for the soiled utility room sinks and when tracing the hot water lines, they found the lines were cut at some point, but did not know why or when the lines were cut. During observations on 06/23/2025 at 11:02 AM, no hot water would dispense from the hand wash sink in the C-unit soiled utility room. When turning the hot water handle, no water would dispense. During an interview 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-27 · 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 review conducted during a Recertification Survey from 06/23/2025 to 06/27/2025, for one (1) (Resident #43) of two (2) residents reviewed, the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs including resident goals, desired outcomes, and preferences. Specifically, Resident #43 was care planned to be at risk for developing pressure ulcers but was not documented as having an active pressure ulcer as indicated on their Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool) upon their admission to the facility. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 11/28/2016, documented it was the policy of the facility that each resident has an interdisciplinary comprehensive care plan. The care plan summarizes the team approach to active and/or potential problems or concerns based on the care…

  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 · D2025-06-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey from 06/23/2025 to 06/27/2025, the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for one (1) (Resident #23) of five (5) residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #23, who had a history of dysphagia (difficulty swallowing foods or liquids) was observed eating in their room without adequate supervision as recommended. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Assistance with Meals, revised March 2022, included all residents would be encouraged to eat in the dining room. Resident #23 had diagnoses including dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), adult failure to thrive, and muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (a resident assessment tool), dated 03/31/2025, documented Resident #23 had severe cognitive impairment and required set-up/clean-up assistance with meals. Physician's orders, dated 06/18/2025, included a consistent carbohydrate diet, whole consistency as tolerated texture, regular thin liquids, and out of bed…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-28 · 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 observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey 6/22/23 to 6/28/23, it was determined that for one (Resident #40) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs), the facility did not ensure the residents received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene. Specifically, Resident #40 was observed with dirty and long nails over several days. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Care of Fingernails/Toenails, dated September 2011, included that the purpose of the procedure is to keep nails trimmed and cleaned, and to prevent infections. The policy included that nail care includes cleaning and trimming. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), pulmonary hypertension (a form of high blood pressure that affects the heart and lungs), and aortic valve dysfunction (heart dysfunction). The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE],…

  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 · D2023-06-28 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
  Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
  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 review conducted during the Recertification Survey 6/22/23-6/28/23, it was determined that for one (Resident #33 of three residents reviewed for activities, the facility did not provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment, the interests and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of the resident. Specifically, the resident was observed on multiple occasions sitting alone, not invited to participate in current activities and not provided with sunglasses as requested due to vision concerns. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #33 had diagnoses of dementia with severe agitation, glaucoma and hearing loss. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], documented that the resident had severely impaired cognitive skills and required extensive assist of staff for locomotion on and off the unit. The MDS Assessment also included that participating in their favorite activities was very…

  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 · D2023-06-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide 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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey 6/22/23 to 6/28/23, it was determined that for one (Resident #40) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care, the facility did not provide specialized care needs for the provision of respiratory care in accordance with professional standard of practice, and the resident's care plan, goals, and preferences. Specifically, Resident #40 did not receive oxygen (O2) as ordered. This is evidenced by the following: Review of the undated facility policy Respiratory Therapy - Prevention of Infection Procedure, included that distilled water is to be used for humidification, and that the refillable humidifier unit water levels are to be checked daily. The humidifier container is to be changed at least weekly. Review of the facility policy Changing Oxygen Tubing, dated August 2020, included that O2 tubing connects the O2 source (oxygen concentrator or oxygen tank) to the resident and has a delivery method (nasal cannula,…

  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 · E2021-09-10 · 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 reviews conducted during a Recertification Survey completed on 9/10/21, it was determined that the facility did not implement written policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property related to screening prospective employees. Specifically, a nurse aide registry abuse screening was not completed prior to hire for three (Employees #3, #5, and #6) of six employee files reviewed. The findings are: On 9/7/21 the Administrator provided the surveyor with a facility policy titled: Abuse, Neglect, And Exploitation, Prohibition, Training, Investigation, And Reporting. The policy included: Screening/Prevention-Registry: All staff that are being considered for hire must also be checked with the New York State Nurse Aide Registry (https://registry.prometric.com/registry/public) for a history of findings. Licensed personnel that are being considered for hire must be checked with approved boards as well. The printed web screen with verification of date checked will satisfy the State and Federal requirements. 2.…

  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 · Ecited before2021-09-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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

  Based on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey, completed on 9/10/21, for 1 (Resident #56) of 20 residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure the resident's care plan was implemented regarding leg splints. Specifically, therapy recommendations on the use of bilateral leg splints daily following a hospital stay were not implemented as recommended with no explanation. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #56 had diagnoses including severe intellectual disabilities, adult failure to thrive and contractures of the right and left knees. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 8/23/21, revealed the resident was severely impaired cognitively, had functional limitation in range of motion (ROM) of both lower extremities (hip, knee, ankle, foot), required extensive assistance of two staff for dressing and did not ambulate. The current Comprehensive Care Plan and the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Resident Profile Sheet (directs daily care) directed bilateral knee extension splints to be worn daily when out of bed in wheelchair, 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.

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to HURLBUT CARE — 13 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

2 organizational owners 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.

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.

About 77% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $916K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NY