No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Seneca Health Care Center

2987 Seneca Street, West Seneca, NY 14224 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 160 certified beds · (716) 828-0500 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (716) 828-0500 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0604, F0607, F0609) — most recent Jan 20232 actual-harm citations$9,110 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • the CMS record shows $9,110 in federal fines (most recent 2025-11-05)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
Pharmacy
290 Center Rd · (716) 675-0000 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Wegmans0.3 mi
370 Orchard Park Rd · (716) 826-4000 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Briarwood0.3 mi
Briarwood Drive · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 fell from 5 to 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased12.7%14.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.2%5.8%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%0.5%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.4%19.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.5%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.6%12.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.8%13.2%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.7%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.6%6.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.9%19.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.8%13.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.6%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine85.7%78.8%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission17.8%20.6%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.8%9.6%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.361.701.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.601.361.80better

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.

52.0% 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 160 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.44U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.18hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.22hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.0% 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 80 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.0%CMS range 45.7–60.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.7%CMS range 7.0–13.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge60.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge43.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge58.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified99.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 discharge98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 4.3–11.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.851.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.32
RN hours/ resident / day
1.24
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.25
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.81
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.14
RN hoursweekends
45.7%
Total nursing turnover
43.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 160 beds and averages 151.5 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.81 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.32 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.25 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.99 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.40 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-11-08)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2023-01-12)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-11-05 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review conducted during a Complaint investigation (2588244), the facility failed to ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (1) of four (4) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. Specifically, Resident #1 was care planned not to be left alone in the bathroom while toileting. On 07/12/2025, Resident #1 was left unattended, fell off the toilet and sustained a left hip fracture requiring surgical intervention. This resulted in actual harm to Resident #1 that is not Immediate Jeopardy.The finding is:The policy titled Fall Prevention revised 08/2025, documented that all reasonable steps are taken to keep the resident safe from falls and related injury. Residents would be evaluated for their potential risk for falls to assure that measures were implemented to keep residents safe from falls and related injury. Recommendations from the interdisciplinary team members would be incorporated into the resident's individual care plan and 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2023-01-12 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review completed during a Standard survey completed on 1/12/23, the facility did not ensure that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (Resident #48) of 4 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #48 required 1:1 observation for safety as per their [NAME] (guide used by staff to provide care). Resident #48 had an unwitnessed fall in their room on 10/17/22 and sustained a right femur (long thigh bone) fracture that required hospitalization and surgical intervention. This resulted in actual harm to Resident #48 that was not Immediate Jeopardy. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Fall Prevention with a revised date of 04/2015, documented recommendations from the interdisciplinary team members will be incorporated into the resident's individual care plan. The facility P&P titled Interdisciplinary Care Planning with a revised date of 1/18/2021, documented the [NAME] must always be current and accurately…

    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 · D2024-11-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    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

    Based on interview and record review conducted during the Standard survey completed on 11/8/24, the facility did not ensure the resident has the right to exercise his or her rights as a resident of the facility and as citizen or resident of the United States for one (Resident #119) of one resident reviewed for voting. Specifically, Resident #119 was not afforded the right to vote in the November 2024 Presidential Election. The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Residents' Rights: Voting dated 10/2024 documented the facility affirm and support the right of residents to vote. The Activities Department, with the assistance of nursing, will evaluate the resident's voting ability and preferences upon admission and as needed. The resident's voting preferences will be documented on the care plan. Current regulations under Residents' Rights related to exercising the right as a citizen of the United States to vote, including the use of mail for mail-in or absentee ballots include exercise of rights: the resident has the right to exercise his or her rights as a resident of 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 · D2024-11-08 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview conducted during the Standard survey completed on 11/8/24, the facility did not ensure residents had the right to choose activities, schedules, and health care consistent with their interests, assessments, and plan of care for two (Resident #3 and #119) of three residents reviewed for choices. Specifically, Resident #3 was provided bed baths instead of showers as planned and per their preference; Resident #119 was not provided with showers twice a week per their preference. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Resident Preferences and Accommodation of Needs revised on 11/4/21, documented the resident has a right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of individual needs, personal, and cultural, expect when the health or safety of the individual or other residents would be endangered. Residents will be offered the opportunity to participate in formulation of their plan of care, morning and bedtime routines 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-08 · 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 Complaint investigation (#NY00351900) during the Standard survey completed on 11/8/24, the facility did not ensure that residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for three (Resident #1, #16 and #96) of eight residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #1 was observed with greasy hair, Resident #16 and Resident #96 were observed to have dried brown debris under their fingernails. The findings are: The policy and procedure titled Bathing and Grooming revised 2/2019, documented residents were bathed as often as necessary to maintain cleanliness. Tub baths or showers are given by all nursing personnel as scheduled/preferred. The policy and procedure titled Nail Care revised on 10/11 documented the purpose was to ensure cleanliness and to prevent infection. Routine nail care was to be done following a bath/shower whenever possible. 1. Resident #1…

    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 · D2024-11-08 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the Standard survey completed on 11/8/24, the facility did not ensure that residents who had an indwelling (foley) catheter (tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) received the appropriate care and services to manage catheters for two (Residents #27 & #53) of three residents reviewed. Specifically, there was a lack of a urology follow- up following a cystoscopy (diagnostic test to inspect the interior lining of the bladder and urethra), and a foley leg bag was not used during day time hours as planned (#53); and infection control practices were not maintained (#27 & #53). In addition, staff inaccurately documented the placement of the foley leg bag in the treatment record (#53). The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Process for Scheduling Outside Appointments, revised 6/24, documented the facility will assist the resident in gaining access to specialty providers per their preference and per provider recommendations when needed…

    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 · E2023-01-12 · 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 started on 1/5/23 and completed on 1/12/23, 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 four (Employees A, B, C, D) of five employees reviewed who were hired in the last four months 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 employment. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure titled, Criminal Background Checks (Fingerprinting), revised 2/2022, documented that the facility does not employ or otherwise engage individuals who have a finding entered into the state nurse aide registry concerning abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, or mistreatment. Additionally, the facility will check the nurse aide registry and sex offender registry for all new hires, agency…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-12 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the Standard survey started on 1/5/23 and completed on 1/12/23 the facility did not ensure that the resident is free from physical restraints for the purposes of discipline or convenience, and that are not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms when the use of restraints is indicated, the facility must use the least restrictive alternative for the least amount of time and document ongoing re-evaluation of the need for restraints. Specifically, for one (Resident #122) of one resident reviewed there was no documentation identifying the medical symptom being treated and no signed physician's order for a trial of the seatbelt from 4/26/22 through 7/19/22. In addition, through observation the staff did not release the seat belt restraint every 2 hours and did not offer toileting on 1/10/23 and during meals on 1/6/23, 1/9/23, and 1/10/23 the seat belt was not released per the plan of care. The Minimum Data Set (MDS-a resident 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-12 · 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 reviews conducted during a Standard survey started on 1/5/2023 and completed on 1/12/23, the facility did not ensure that each resident who was unable to carry out Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene for two (Residents #48, #65) of four residents reviewed for ADLs. Specifically, there was lack of hand hygiene and glove changes in between fecal incontinence care and perineum (genital area) care. In addition, the CNAs (certified nursing assistants) touched objects (residents' clothing, lift sling, gym mat and pillowcases) while wearing the same gloves used to provide incontinence care. The findings are: Review of the facility policy and procedure (P&P) titled Perineal Care dated 6/22 documented perineal care provided comfort. The procedure included: Wash hands, apply gloves; Wash perineal area from front to back to prevent contamination. Remove gloves, wash hands, and apply new gloves. 1. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2020-03-12 · 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

    Based on interview and record review conducted during a complaint investigation (Complaint #NY00245489) during the Standard survey completed on 3/12/20, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations of abuse including injuries of unknown origin are reported immediately in accordance with State Law through established procedures. One (Resident #101) of two residents reviewed for abuse reporting had an issue. Specifically, the facility did not report an allegation of abuse to the New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH) within the 2-hour required time frame. The finding is: A facility policy entitled Abuse Reporting and Facility Incident Reporting dated 7/2017 documented that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, and reasonable suspicion of a crime against a resident are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$9,110 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $9,110 — penalty dated 2025-11-05

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE MCGUIRE GROUP — 6 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.7-0.7 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.5-0.5 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.7★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
VESTRA SPV1 LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 12/23/2020
VESTRA SPV2 LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 12/23/2020
FARBENBLUM, EDWARDIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/23/2020
LIEBERMAN, ORLYIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/23/2020
GRIGG, SUSANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2024
PHAN, TOMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
ROSSO, RALPHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
TIU SNYDERMAN, ZERLINEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
WHITTEMORE, KIRSTENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$17.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-24.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$16K
Related-party expense0% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 70%Medicare 6%Other / private 24%

This home reported $16K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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

$431per resident / day
operating cost
$13,102per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$345per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in New York
$15,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$16,729/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,110/mo
Assisted living

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 335504. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-11-08, 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.

What to do next