Samaritan Senior Village, INC

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.

33.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 167 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 59.7% 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 72 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% 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 168 beds and averages 161.0 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.37 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.34 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.07 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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.

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

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification survey conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024 the facility did not ensure food was stored and prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the main kitchen. Specifically, potentially hazardous foods were not cooled properly in the main kitchen, and there was insufficient lighting in the walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer. Findings include: The facility policy, Food Procurement Receiving Handling Storing Preparing, revised 7/12/2024, documented the facility ensured proper cooling of food, and proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness. 1) Improperly Cooled Potentially Hazardous Foods The facility document Temperature-Time Cooling Log did not document any food products cooled on 8/12/2024. One item was documented as cooled on 8/13/2024, but it did not identify what the food was on the form. The log documented when cooling any stock, sauce, or potentially hazardous food, the use of the log would enable one to monitor and document 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00344344, NY00344487, and NY00347064) surveys conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #59, #67 and #86) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #59 did not have their palm protectors (contracture management device) applied as care planned; Resident #67 did not have their elastic tubular compression bandage (Tubigrip) applied as ordered; and Resident #86 had a skin tear (a wound resulting from separation of the top layer of skin from the second layer) and initial treatment orders were not obtained, and the wound dressing was unclean. Findings include: The facility policy, Rehab-Splints-Upper Extremities-SSV reviewed 3/11/2024 documented the occupational therapist evaluated the resident's upper extremities 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview during the recertification survey conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 3 of 5 medication carts (Second floor B side and Fourth floor A and B sides), and 1 of 4 medication rooms (First floor B side). Specifically, the First floor B side medication room was missing medication refrigerator temperatures; the Fourth floor B side medication cart was unlocked and unattended; the Second floor B side and the Fourth floor A side medication carts had eye drops that were not labeled after they were opened. Findings include: The facility policy, Storage of Medication Policy, last reviewed 3/4/2024, documented all medications and biologicals were stored safely, securely, and properly, and followed manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. Medication rooms, carts, and medication supplies were locked when they were not attended by persons with…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observation, and interview during the recertification survey conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident received and the facility provided food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at safe and appetizing temperatures for 1 of 2 meal test trays (the 8/13/2024 First floor A side lunch meal); for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #22 and #31) reviewed; and for 7 of 7 anonymous residents present at the Resident Council meeting. Specifically, food was not served at palatable and appetizing temperatures for the First floor A side lunch meal on 8/13/2024; and Residents #22, #31, and the attendees of the Resident Council meeting stated the food did not taste good and was not hot. Findings include: The facility policy, Food Procurement Receiving Handling Storing Preparing, revised and reviewed 7/12/2024 documented food above 41 degrees Fahrenheit and below 135 degrees Fahrenheit allowed the rapid growth of pathogenic microorganisms that could cause foodborne illness. The facility policy, Adequate Diet and Menu Planning to Accommodate…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-16 · 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 observation, interview, and record review during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00347064) surveys conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #92) reviewed. Specifically, Residents #92's electric wheelchair was unclean. Findings include: The facility policy, Wheelchair/Transport Chair Cleaning Protocol, revised 9/10/2017 documented the facility ensured the resident was provided a sanitary and pleasant environment, equipment was cleaned and disinfected once a month and daily as needed, and each unit had a designated week of cleaning throughout the month. The undated facility document Skilled 4A Side Wheelchairs (wheelchair cleaning log) did not document the resident's chair was cleaned. Resident #92 was admitted to the facility with the diagnoses including left hemiplegia and hemiparesis (weakness and paralysis of the left side of the body) following a cerebral infarction (stroke). The 7/18/2024 Minimum Data Set documented the 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-16 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
  Honor 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 record review and interviews during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00344487) surveys conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that prompt efforts were made to resolve grievances for 1 of 1 resident (Resident # 26) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #26's family member sent an electronic message to the facility's Administrator regarding their concerns and their concerns were not addressed timely. Findings include: The facility's policy, Complaint Grievance and Recommendation, revised 7/28/2024 documented that residents' next of kin or designated representatives were provided a method by which to express complaints and/or recommendations, both verbally and in writing, and that such complaints and/or recommendations would be responded to as soon as possible. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including transient ischemic attack (mini stroke), abnormalities of gait and mobility, and muscle weakness. The 6/20/2024 Minimum Data Set Assessment documented the resident had intact cognition, did not reject care, and required partial/…

  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 · D2024-08-16 · 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

  Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the recertification survey conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure the development and implementation of a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #125) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #125's comprehensive care plan did not include a diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes (the body is unable to use insulin properly causing high blood sugar). Findings include: The facility policy, Comprehensive Care Planning, revised 10/1/2023, documented the facility would ensure that an individualized care plan was initiated for all residents, and chronic, active diagnoses would be care planned for. The facility policy, Diabetes Management, revised 2/3/2020 documented staff would identify and report issues that may affect, or be affected by, a patient's diabetes and diabetes management such as foot infections, skin ulceration, increased thirst, or hypoglycemia (low blood sugar). Resident #125 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. The 7/19/2024 Minimum Data Set 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-16 · 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

  Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification and abbreviated (NY00344344, NY00344487, and NY00347064) surveys conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #26) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #26 was not assisted out of bed as requested. Findings include: The facility policy, Activities of Daily Living, revised 4/2024 documented activity of daily living tasks included personal hygiene, toileting, feeding, bed mobility, transfer, walking in the room and corridor, locomotion on and off the unit and dressing. Certified nurse aides documented activity of daily living support and performance. Resident #26 had diagnoses including transient ischemic attack (mini stroke), abnormalities of gait and mobility, and muscle weakness. The 6/20/2024 Minimum Data Set Assessment documented the resident had intact cognition, did not reject care, and required partial/ moderate assistance…

  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 · D2024-08-16 · 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

  Based on observation, record review, and interview during the recertification survey conducted 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure ongoing provision of programs to support each resident in their choices of activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #137) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #137 was not assisted to attend an activity that was meaningful to them and met their interests and preferences. Findings include: The facility policy, Activities, effective 4/19/2024 documented the activities program appealed to each resident's interests and enhanced the resident's highest practicable level of physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing based upon the resident's comprehensive assessment. Activities were relevant to the specific needs, interests, cultural, background, etcetera of the individual. The facility's August 2024 Recreational Therapy Calendar documented on 8/14/2024 at 2:00 PM there was a Petting Zoo activity on the front lawn. Resident #137 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-16 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  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 8/12/2024-8/16/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents who required dialysis (a procedure to remove waste products and excess fluid from the blood when the kidneys stop working properly) services received such services consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #37) reviewed. Specifically, Resident #37 received hemodialysis treatments at a community-based dialysis center and did not have ongoing assessments of their condition and monitoring for complications before and after dialysis treatments. Additionally, there was not consistent ongoing communication and collaboration between the facility and the dialysis center. Findings include: The facility policy, Dialysis, effective 4/19/2024 documented the facility maintained proper standards related to dialysis protocol and good communication was maintained with the facility that provided dialysis. A communication book went with the resident each time they went to dialysis. The purpose of the book…

  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

“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.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.

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.

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 75% 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 $1.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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