3322 Silverside Road, Wilmington, DE 19810 · New Castle County · (302) 478-8889
116 certified beds, about 100 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2012
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 085056 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 27, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Delaware average is 10.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 29 health citations since March 2024, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $10,608 in the last three years; the largest was $10,608, and the latest is dated March 27, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.99 hours per resident per day, against 4.35 across Delaware and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.91 of those hours.
48.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Delaware average 41.3%).
CMS links it to Cadia Healthcare, an affiliated group of 5 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 29 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of other documentation as indicated, it was determined that for three (R12, R63, and R76) out of three residents sampled for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that the residents received adequate assistance and supervision to prevent accidents to the extent possible. R12, a completely dependent resident, sustained a fall from the bed to the floor while a staff member was providing care and sustained a right ankle fracture. R63, a resident who required extensive assistance for transfers, sustained L2 and L3 fractures during a transfer from the shower bed to the bed and was sent emergently to the hospital. R76, a resident who was completely dependent on staff for transfers, sustained an injury to the top of his head during a transfer from a mechanical lift to his motorized wheelchair. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that for one (R23) out of thirty-four residents sampled for resident rights the facility failed to ensure R23 was provided with a dignified dining experience during lunch.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews it was determined for one (R23) out of thirty four residents sampled for accommodations the facility failed to ensure R23's call light was within reach.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and other documentation as indicated, it was determined that one (R76) out of three residents sampled for choices, the facility failed to ensure that R76, a resident who was completely dependent on the staff for showers, received showers per his preference to maintain good grooming and hygiene.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R43) out of three residents reviewed for accident hazards, the facility failed to notify the provider when a new skin alteration was identified after an earlier incident where R43 spilled coffee.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and other facility documentation it was determined for one (R12) out of four residents sampled for falls the facility failed to ensure that an RN performed the initial post fall assessment and documentation after R12 slid off of the bed and was lowered to the floor on the 11 PM-7 AM shift. An RN post fall assessment was not performed until the 7 AM - 3PM shift.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that for one (R1) out of five residents reviewed for communication, the facility failed to provide R1 with a fully functional phone in her room or a location outside her room where calls can be made without being overheard.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for five (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5) out of five residents reviewed for care plans, the facility failed to have evidence that an attending physician participated in the IDT team care plan meeting.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R1) out of five residents reviewed for social services, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to R1, a resident diagnosed with a paranoid personality disorder.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R3) out of five residents reviewed resident records, the facility failed to accurately document in the EMR that R3 had a responsible party who makes medical decisions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported for one of three residents (Resident (R) 80) reviewed for abuse. The facility did not report to the State Agency alleged staff-to-resident abuse within the required time frame. Facility staff did not report R80's allegation of employee-to-resident abuse to the Administrator. This failure to report the allegation in a timely manner allowed the accused staff member to continue working in the facility with other residents. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 07/07/24, undetermined time between 12:00 PM and 3:00 PM. On 03/13/25 at 7:42 PM, the Administrator was notified of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Past Non-Compliance (PNC) in the area of Resident Abuse at F609. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to follow Transmission Based Precautions, use proper hand hygiene, and change gloves during incontinent care. These breaches in infection control could cause a spread in disease and affect all the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to inform seven of seven residents in the resident council about the facility's grievance policy, the grievance official responsible for overseeing the grievance process was with their contact information and resolve grievances for three (Residents (R)158, R34, and R59) of three residents reviewed for grievances. This failure could prevent residents from addressing concerns and seeking resolution, leading to frustration and potentially impacting their well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent. During observation of medication pass, there were three errors observed out of 30 opportunities, resulting in a 10% error rate. This had the potential to place two residents (Residents (R) 36 and R93) at risk of not receiving the full benefit of their medication therapy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the outdoor garbage/dumpster area was maintained in a manner to prevent pests from accessing garbage. A large dumpster contained garbage; there was no lid, and the bags were observed with holes and food.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, staff interview, and resident interview, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from abuse for three of three (Resident (R) 80, 359, 78) reviewed for abuse of 41 sampled residents. This failure to protect the residents increased the risk of further exposure to abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an injury of unknown origin was investigated for one out of 11 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident (R)2). R2's thumb was noted with a 1.5 centimeter (cm) by 1.5 cm purple area with swelling; once staff to resident abuse was ruled out as a potential cause, the facility failed to investigate further to determine how R2 sustained the injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide written notification of a facility-initiated transfer to the resident/responsible party (RP) for three (Resident (R)41, R30, and R258) of four residents reviewed for hospitalization. The failure had the potential to affect the residents and/or their representative concerning the resident's appeal rights.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents (Resident (R) 30) reviewed for hospital transfers was given a written copy of a bed hold notice prior to or within 24-hours of emergency transfer to the hospital. This failure created the potential for residents and/or responsible parties not to have the information needed to safeguard their return to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed for one resident (Resident (R) 208) from a sample of 41 residents reviewed. This failure has the potential to negatively impact R208 and others that have similar orders that currently reside at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that fall interventions were followed for one resident (Resident (R) 82) out of five residents reviewed for falls, out of a sample of 41 residents. This failure had the potential to negatively impact R82 and other residents residing in the facility by not ensuring that staff consistently implemented fall interventions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident with a urinary catheter bag was properly positioned in a manner to prevent potential urinary tract infections due to contamination for one of six residents (Resident (R)99) reviewed for urinary catheters and urinary tract infections out of a total sample of 41 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the responsible party (RP) for one of three residents (Resident(R)214) sampled for pressure ulcers, were made aware of the resident's change in condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, review of housekeeping procedures, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident (R)1) room out of 33 rooms observed was properly cleaned to ensure a homelike environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy review, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure two Residents of six residents (Resident (R) 62 and R86) reviewed for abuse remained free from physical abuse. A total of 33 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that an allegation of staff to resident abuse was reported timely to the State Agency for one of six residents (Resident(R)62) sampled for allegations of abuse. This had the potential to place the resident at risk for further abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy review, record review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation was completed related to allegations of potential abuse for two Residents of six residents (Resident (R)59 and R62) reviewed for abuse. A total of 33 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to complete a smoking assessment and secure smoking materials for one (Resident (R)61) out of one resident who the facility identified as a smokier out of a sample of 33 residents. This had the potential for an accident/hazard related to smoking.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to allow 30 days for a resident or their responsible party to rescind the voluntary Attachment #3: Binding Arbitration Agreement after it was signed. This failure would take the right to rescind the agreement away.
1 fire safety citation on file: 1 on March 27, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 27, 2025 | Fine | $10,608 |
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 | Delaware | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.99 | 4.35 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.91 | 0.97 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.80 | 3.89 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.18 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.89 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 48.1% | 41.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 21.7% | 41.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.56 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 4.06 on weekdays and 3.80 on weekends, 6% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.31 in April to June 2025 to 3.99 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 | 3.99 | 0.91 | 4.06 | 3.80 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 100 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.01 | 0.90 | 4.09 | 3.83 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 104 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.32 | 0.98 | 4.42 | 4.07 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 93 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.31 | 0.92 | 4.38 | 4.13 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 98 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Delaware, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.05 | 0.79 | 4.21 | 3.67 | 5.7% | 0% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Delaware, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.21 | $18.51 to $21.74 | 5,530 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.03 | $30.97 to $36.07 | 2,240 |
| Registered nurses | $47.85 | $41.30 to $53.71 | 14,290 |
| 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 | Delaware | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.2 | 12.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.2 | 13.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 3.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 10.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.8 | 23.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.2 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Cadia Rehabilitation Silverside's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (65.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
65.7% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Delaware: 17 better, 1 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. 445 eligible stays.
8.7% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Delaware: 1 better, 0 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. 411 eligible stays.
7.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Delaware: 0 better, 0 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. 286 eligible stays.
61.3% this home
Median of homes: Delaware59.6% · 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. 111 residents counted.
0.9% this home
Median of homes: Delaware0.8% · 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. 226 residents counted.
2.5% this home
Median of homes: Delaware2.4% · 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. 226 residents counted.
93.9% this home
Median of homes: Delaware98.7% · 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. 33 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: ONIX SILVERSIDE LLC. CMS links this home to Cadia Healthcare, a group of 5 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schafer, Ron | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 07/18/2011 | |
| Silver, Stephen | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 07/18/2011 | |
| Litwa, Karen | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Long Term Care Corp | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2008 | |
| Onix Group Ll | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/23/2025 | |
| Dittmar, Laura | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2020 | |
| Price, Elizabeth | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Long Term Care Corp | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/23/2025 | |
| Onix Group Ll | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/23/2025 | |
| Dittmar, Laura | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2020 | |
| Litwa, Karen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Price, Elizabeth | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Schafer, Ron | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Silver, Stephen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/18/2011 |
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 Delaware. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.