Home / New Jersey / Passaic
360 Chestnut Street, Passaic, NJ 07055 · Passaic County · (973) 777-7800
111 certified beds, about 107 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1968
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 315085 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 12, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the New Jersey average is 8.6, the national average 9.2).
Of 29 health citations since August 2022, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $41,688 in the last three years; the largest was $41,688, and the latest is dated December 5, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.23 hours per resident per day, against 3.85 across New Jersey and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.38 of those hours.
41.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (New Jersey average 39.7%).
CMS links it to Complete Care, an affiliated group of 85 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 pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to identify, assess, and implement timely and appropriate interventions for a resident (Resident #59) with an unplanned significant weight loss of 27.9 pounds (lbs.) or 17.23% significant weight loss in six months and a 31.6 lbs. or 19.13% significant weight loss in one month. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #59) reviewed for nutrition, and was evidenced by the following:The surveyor reviewed the medical record for Resident #59. A review of the admission Record, located under the Profile tab in the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to offer an alternate meal option of similar nutritive value to residents who refused the entree at lunch and dinner. The facility failed to address the residents' concerns of removing the alternate meal item from the menu since January 2026, replacing the alternate with an Also Available menu with less nutritive value, not identifying the change to the residents, and obtaining their input, and not addressing the changes to the Resident Council. This failure had the potential to affect 100 of the 106 residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the oven, stock pot, fans, and food containers were kept clean. The failure had the potential to affect 100 out of 106 residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure required transfer and discharge procedures were followed for one of five residents (Resident (R) 111) reviewed for discharges out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO) of R111's discharge to the community. This failure had the potential to affect oversight, advocacy, and the resident's right to access Ombudsman services related to the discharge.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents had the correct code status, which matched their physician's orders in the medical record, that identified their wishes in the event of a medical emergency. This deficient practice was identified for 3 of 31 residents reviewed for code status (Resident #4, R #36, and R #40). 1. Resident #40 had a Practitioner Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST; a form that enables residents to indicate their preferences regarding life-sustaining treatment) dated [DATE], for a full-code status (all resuscitation procedures will be provided when a person stops breathing or their heart stops beating). A review of a physician's order (PO) dated [DATE], indicated the resident had a code status of do not resuscitate (DNR; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) ensured staff implemented the facility's code status policy for residents during a medical emergency to ensure residents' wishes regarding life-sustaining treatments were honored. This deficient practice was identified for 3 of 31 residents reviewed for code status (Resident #4, R #36. and R #40). Refer F 578 1. Resident #40 had a Practitioner Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST; a form that enables residents to indicate their preferences regarding life-sustaining treatment) dated [DATE], for a full-code status (all resuscitation procedures will be provided when a person stops breathing or their heart stops beating). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain documentation of the facility's ongoing Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program. This failure had the potential to negatively affect 103 of 103 residents who resided at the facility. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy titled, QAPI Plan Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement, updated 05/24 indicated, . Complete Care's mission is to continue its long history of providing the highest quality person-centered post-acute short-term subacute rehabilitation and long-term care residency in an environment that couples warmth of care with clinical The administrator, or designee, is responsible for assuring that all QAPI activities and required documentation is completed and/or up to date. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure care plans were updated for placement of a new suprapubic catheter, pressure ulcer treatment and prevention, change in eating ability, and smoking for four of 31 residents (Residents #4, R #13, R #61, and R #301) and failed to schedule and hold quarterly care plan meetings with residents and families for five residents (R #4, R #60, R #51, R #3, and R #50) out of 31 residents in the sample. As a result of this deficient practice, the residents had the potential for unmet care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to identify and/or implement interventions to prevent and/or treat pressure ulcers for three of six residents (Resident #92, R #101, and R #13) reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity when staff searched (1) one of 73 residents' (Resident #60) room without permission for linens and towels. This failure had the potential to cause resident to feel undignified. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Quality of Life - Dignity, revised 10/2024, revealed, . Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances the quality of life, dignity, respect, and individuality. Residents' private space and property shall be respected at all times. Staff will knock and request permission before entering residents' rooms. Staff will not handle or move a resident's personal belongings (including radios and televisions) without the resident's permission. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident or resident's representative was informed of the risks and benefits associated with taking psychotropic medications for (2) two of (3)three (Resident #82 and #89) reviewed for unnecessary medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, policy review and record review, the facility was unable to provide documentation that (1) one of (2) two residents (Resident #51) reviewed for personal funds received their quarterly statements.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to report to the State Agency (SA) an allegation of neglect after a resident fell out of bed while staff was providing care and sustained a head injury for one of three residents (Resident #99) reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of neglect after a resident fell out of bed while staff was providing care and sustained a head injury for one of three residents (Resident #99) reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I assessment was completed accurately for one resident (Resident #2) out of a total sample of 31 residents reviewed for Level 1 PASRR screenings. This had the potential to prevent or delay additional services to a resident that may qualify for Level II services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure improper incontinent care was provided to dependent residents for 2 residents (Resident #12 and Resident #87) out of a sample of 31 residents. This had the potential to effect all residents who require staff assistance with incontinent care. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #12's Face Sheet, located in electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed the resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis of dementia. Review of Resident #12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/07/24, and located in the EMR under the MDS tab, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six out of 15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident receiving oxygen therapy had orders in place for one of one resident (Resident #4) reviewed for oxygen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received alternative measures prior to installation of side rails, and that risk for entrapment was assessed for two residents reviewed for side rails (Resident #54 and R #36) of 31 sampled residents. The lack of alternate side rail measures and assessment for entrapment could lead to potential restraint or side rail entrapment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure identified Care Plan interventions were implemented timely, and the resident's physician was notified of significant weight loss for one resident, (Resident (R)69), of one reviewed for a significant weight loss. Specifically, R69's physician was not notified when R69's weight decreased and to potentially obtain orders to treat the weight loss and R69's supplements were not given as ordered in a timely manner. In total, R69's weight went from 155 pounds (lbs) to 113 lbs.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure written information on advance directives (a legal document, such as a Power of Attorney (POA), Living Will, or an advance decision-making document which authorizes a designated person to make healthcare decisions on behalf of an individual if incapacitated) was provided to one of five residents, (Residents (R) 152), reviewed for advance directives out of a total sample of 25 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to notify the physician and family, after one resident, (Resident (R) 69), of one reviewed for notification who had a significant weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure a shared bathroom for two resident rooms (rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]), for a total of four residents, had a secure toilet to prevent any potential accident hazards.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one of three residents, (Resident (R) 103), reviewed for MDS in a total sample of 25 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual, and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive plan of care with measurable goals and plans for one resident, (Resident (R) 88), of four reviewed for care plans related to catheters. Specifically, R88 did not have a Care Plan to address a foley catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were revised for two of 25 residents sampled, (Resident (R) 27 and R26), to accurately reflect the residents' health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide justification for the continued use of an indwelling Foley catheter for one, (Resident (R)8), of two residents reviewed with an indwelling Foley catheter. The facility further failed to ensure the proper positioning of the indwelling Foley catheter bag.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for one resident, (Resident (R) 151), out of five residents regarding code status(treatment made in the event a person's heart or breathing stops).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, facility policy review, and review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to offer two of five residents reviewed for flu/pneumonia vaccinations (Resident (R) 66 and R74) and/or their representatives, the opportunity for the resident to be vaccinated in accordance with nationally recognized standards. The facility failed to offer R66 the opportunity to be vaccinated with Pneumococcal 15-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV15) in accordance with nationally recognized standards. The facility failed to offer R74 the opportunity to be vaccinated with Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) and if this vaccination was not available to offer one dose of Prevnar 20 (PCV20). The failed practice had the potential to increase the risk for these residents to contract pneumonia.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident beds were routinely inspected for safety, including one resident (Resident (R) 26) with full side rails. This had the potential for injury for all the residents of the facility.
14 fire safety citations on file: 4 on June 12, 2026, 4 on December 5, 2024, 6 on August 18, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 5, 2024 | Fine | $41,688 |
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 | New Jersey | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.23 | 3.85 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.38 | 0.68 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.78 | 3.50 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.94 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.91 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.8% | 39.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 37.7% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.05 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 3.42 on weekdays and 2.78 on weekends, 19% 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 3.40 in April to June 2025 to 3.23 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 | 3.23 | 0.38 | 3.42 | 2.78 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 107 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.35 | 0.39 | 3.49 | 2.97 | 0.0% | 1 of 92 | 105 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.19 | 0.51 | 3.40 | 2.64 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 104 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.40 | 0.59 | 3.62 | 2.88 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 102 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| New Jersey, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.68 | 0.59 | 3.82 | 3.34 | 11.6% | 0.2% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Jersey, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.52 | $21.13 to $23.44 | 32,400 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $36.13 | $32.16 to $38.45 | 17,410 |
| Registered nurses | $51.20 | $47.94 to $61.41 | 92,680 |
| 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 | New Jersey | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.5 | 8.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.5 | 8.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 5.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.7 | 12.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 29.9 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.9 | 8.1 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Complete Care at Chestnut Hill LLC's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · New Jersey: 130 better, 19 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. 89 eligible stays.
11.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · New Jersey: 2 better, 8 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. 98 eligible stays.
8.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · New Jersey: 3 better, 13 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. 57 eligible stays.
74.7% this home
Median of homes: New Jersey68.7% · 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. 79 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: New Jersey0.6% · 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. 131 residents counted.
2.2% this home
Median of homes: New Jersey1.7% · 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. 131 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: New Jersey99.5% · 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. 15 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: COMPLETE CARE AT CHESTNUT HILL LLC. CMS links this home to Complete Care, a group of 85 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chestnut Hill Holdco LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/30/2021 |
| Eef Capital LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/30/2021 | |
| PC Chestnut Hill Holdco LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/30/2021 | |
| Schlaff, Benny | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 04/30/2021 | |
| Schlaff, Nachum | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 04/30/2021 | |
| Schwartz, Hershel | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 04/30/2021 | |
| Stein, Shalom | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/30/2021 |
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 New Jersey. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.