Home / Connecticut / Bethel
13 Park Lawn Drive, Bethel, CT 06801 · Western Ct County · (203) 830-4180
161 certified beds, about 152 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 075400 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 22, 2025, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Connecticut average is 13.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 31 health citations since July 2021, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $16,036 in the last three years; the largest was $8,018, and the latest is dated May 10, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.22 hours per resident per day, against 3.73 across Connecticut and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.76 of those hours.
35.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Connecticut average 37.4%).
CMS links it to National Health Care Associates, an affiliated group of 42 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 3 of 4 residents (Resident #8, 60 and 117) reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to ensure signs that included personal and health information, were not posted and visible in the residents' room.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for comfort measures/hospice, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised to include interventions related to comfort measures only.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 2 resident (Resident #8) who were dependent on staff for feeding assistance, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was provided feeding assistance for a meal.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #60) reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to follow the physician's order related to the resident's position in bed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interview for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #84), reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that two staff transferred the resident via a sit to stand lift per physician's orders and professional standards of practice, and for 3 of 6 residents (Resident #51, 71 and 95) reviewed for smoking, the facility failed to ensure that residents who had a history of smoking and/or had been found smoking and/or verbalized to staff that they currently smoked, adhered to the smoking policy and did not smoke on the facility grounds to ensure a hazard free environment, and for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to ensure the environment was free of hazards for a resident assessed at risk to aspirate, and for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #138) reviewed for [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interview the facility failed to date Insulin pens when opened and ensure medications were within their expiration.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who was a recent admission and reviewed for omission of medication, the facility failed to notify the provider or implement proper procedures to authorize payment for a medication that was not covered by the resident's insurance to prevent the omission of a medication for forty-eight (48) days.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to follow the plan of care when obtaining the resident's weight, Resident #1 sustained a foot laceration that required hospitalization as a result.
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents, (Resident #6), reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure the resident's wheelchair cushion was secured to the wheelchair and as a result, the resident fell and sustained an injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on tour of the kitchen and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that the Dietary Department was maintained in a manner that food items were consistently labeled and stored to reflect their age or shelf-life.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interview for 2 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #6 and Resident #30), the facility failed to ensure advance directives in the clinical record matched advanced directives in the electronic health record (EHR).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observations, and interviews for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #44 and #51) reviewed for dining, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided for a resident who required staff assistance with meals and failed to ensure that the care plan reflected the needs of the resident during meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and staff interview for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #30) reviewed for care planning, the facility failed to maintain an accurate and current Resident Care Plan (RCP).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and interview for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for Pressure Ulcers/Injury, the facility failed to follow physician's orders regarding wound treatment as prescribed to promote wound healing.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observations, and interview for 1of 3 residents (Resident #63) reviewed for Position/Mobility, the facility failed to ensure a splint was applied as ordered and the resident's skin was properly cleansed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the [NAME] Wing Treatment Cart remained locked while not in use and unattended.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #542) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure the ordered nutritional supplement was provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #98) reviewed for parenteral/ Intravenous (IV) fluid, the facility failed to ensure that staff assessed in accordance with facility policy and failed to ensure annual IV therapy education and competencies for licensed staff were completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility documentation, and interview for one of five sampled residents (Resident #30) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to identify specific target behaviors and failed to provide documentation of behavior monitoring related to their policy. Resident #30's diagnoses included bipolar disorder, anxiety, gastrointestinal reflux disease, arthritis, and insomnia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #30 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of one person for dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. The MDS also identified Resident #30 was independent with set up for eating and received antipsychotic medication 7 of 7 days, and antidepressant medication 7 of 7 days. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and observation of 1 of 5 medication carts (Plumtree Unit), the facility failed to ensure the pill crusher and medication cart were clean.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interview for 1 of 15 sampled residents (Resident #30) reviewed for dining, the facility failed to ensure Resident #30 received the appropriate consistency diet.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, review of policy and staff interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident # 40) at with a history of pressure ulcer, the facility failed to ensure the licensed staff during wound treatment failed to remove a dirty glove and perform hand hygiene and the facility failed to ensure that (Residents # 45, # 84, # 119 and # 120) bedpans were stored according to facility policy and for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #11) reviewed for dining, the facility failed to ensure proper hygiene practices were utilized during meal delivery.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, facility documentation review and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #44) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) assistance, the facility failed to maintain a resident's bed in operating condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, facility documentation, and interviews for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #21) reviewed for Accidents/Falls, the facility failed to ensure the resident's bed rails were secure.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 5 of 5 residents (Resident #119, Resident #577, Resident #579, Resident #582 and Resident #583) reviewed for advanced directives, the facility failed to ensure completion of the Advanced Directive Consent form.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #92) known to self-administer eye drops, the facility failed to complete a self-administration assessment to ensure Resident #92 was safe to self-administer the medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, facility policy, interviews and observations made during medication administration, the facility failed to administer medications in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one of two residents (Resident #38) reviewed for positioning, the facility failed to ensure a specialty mattress was set correctly.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the employee files, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 3 Nurse Aides (NA #1 and NA #2) reviewed, the facility failed to ensure employee performance evaluations were completed annually.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for dental, the facility failed to provide dental services in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, review of facility policy and documentation the facility failed to clean and disinfect the glucometer in accordance with the device and manufacturer guidelines.
3 fire safety citations on file: 1 on July 22, 2025, 2 on July 21, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2024 | Fine | $8,018 |
| May 10, 2024 | Fine | $8,018 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Connecticut | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.22 | 3.73 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.76 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.69 | 3.37 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.46 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.00 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 35.9% | 37.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 34.6% | 38.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.39 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.43 on weekdays and 3.68 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 4.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.06 in April to June 2025 to 4.22 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.22 | 0.76 | 4.43 | 3.68 | 4.9% | 0 of 90 | 152 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.15 | 0.69 | 4.36 | 3.62 | 6.3% | 0 of 92 | 153 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.18 | 0.70 | 4.41 | 3.62 | 5.7% | 0 of 92 | 153 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.06 | 0.75 | 4.28 | 3.53 | 6.8% | 0 of 91 | 153 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Connecticut, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.66 | 0.61 | 3.80 | 3.31 | 6.0% | 1.3% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Connecticut, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $21.53 | $20.14 to $22.68 | 21,380 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $35.43 | $32.05 to $36.94 | 8,540 |
| Registered nurses | $49.39 | $41.40 to $58.58 | 40,110 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Connecticut | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.4 | 17.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.7 | 16.4 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 4.0 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.7 | 17.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.3 | 24.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.1 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.0 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Bethel Health Care Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (45.3% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
45.3% this home
Worse than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Connecticut: 75 better, 2 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 400 eligible stays.
9.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Connecticut: 0 better, 3 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 358 eligible stays.
8.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Connecticut: 0 better, 2 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 278 eligible stays.
53.2% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut58.9% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 109 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 249 residents counted.
0.8% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut1.6% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 249 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 21 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: BETHEL HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER LLC. CMS links this home to National Health Care Associates, a group of 42 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bethel Investors, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 51% | 01/01/2017 |
| Estate of Roland Charles Butler | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 37% | 04/07/2025 |
| Flight, Grace | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 7% | 06/06/2007 |
| Butler, Helen | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Butler, Mary | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Butler, Matthew | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Butler, Robert | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| McCollam, Mary | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Miller, Meaghan | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Bpb Equity Holdings LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2018 | |
| Cedar Hill Ng Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/14/2025 | |
| Juniper Ng Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/14/2025 | |
| Oak Drive Ng Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/14/2025 | |
| Rolling Hill Ng Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/14/2025 | |
| Geffner, Ira | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Gilmartin, Thomas | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2016 | |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Brody, Amber | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2020 | |
| Healy, Erin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/07/2019 | |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Bokow, Barry | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 01/02/2026 | |
| Barry Bokow 2012 Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/07/2020 | |
| Bethel Health Care Realty, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/13/2017 | |
| Bethel Investors, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2017 | |
| Bpb Ventures LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2017 | |
| Cedar Hill Ng Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/07/2026 | |
| Estate of Roland Charles Butler | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/07/2025 | |
| Juniper Ng Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/07/2026 | |
| Marvin Ostreicher Family Trust 2012 | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/13/2017 | |
| National Health Care Associates Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2017 | |
| Oak Drive Ng Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/07/2026 | |
| Preferred Professional Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2017 | |
| Preferred Therapy Solutions LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2017 | |
| Rolling Hill Ng Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/07/2026 | |
| Susan Ostreicher Family Trust 2012 | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/13/2017 | |
| Almeida, Elizabeth | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Bokow, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/30/2015 | |
| Brody, Amber | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/17/2025 | |
| Flight, Grace | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/13/2017 | |
| Gilmartin, Thomas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2016 | |
| Healy, Erin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/02/2026 | |
| Lopiansky, Rebecca | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/14/2025 | |
| Ostreicher, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/14/2025 | |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/14/2025 | |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Ostreicher, Susan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2017 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Connecticut. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.