210 North Main Street, Canandaigua, NY 14424 · Ontario County · (585) 394-3883
46 certified beds, about 41 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1977
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 335255 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 27, 2024, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the New York average is 8.1, the national average 9.2).
None of its 35 health citations since November 2020 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.84 hours per resident per day, against 3.63 across New York and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.45 of those hours.
85.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (New York average 40.3%).
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 35 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff were available to provide nursing services necessary to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of residents for three (3) of three (3) sampled residents reviewed (Residents #1, #8, and #13), and additional residents identified through facility-generated medication administration audit reports. Specifically, the facility failed to consistently meet staffing levels identified in its Facility Assessment, staffing records reflected repeated discrepancies regarding licensed nursing coverage, and residents experienced delayed medication administration during periods of inadequate staffing.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse for at least eight (8) consecutive hours per day, seven (7) days per week. Specifically, the facility was unable to provide documented evidence of registered nurse coverage within a 24-hour period on three (3) separate days, and (8) hours or more of registered nurse coverage on two (2) separate days during the five (5) months reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure it was administered in a manner which enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or their representatives received information necessary to make informed decisions regarding Medicare coverage enrollment and plan changes and failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect for five (5) of fourteen (14) residents reviewed (Residents #6, #8, #10, #12, and #14). Specifically, under Issue One (1) for three (3) of three (3) residents reviewed (Residents #6, #8, and #10), the facility obtained authorizations permitting the Administrator to act regarding Medicare Part D enrollment and plan changes and failed to ensure residents and/or their representatives received information regarding plan options, financial implications, reenrollment rights, and coverage changes. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide the residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living, the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for three (3) (Residents #5, #10, and #11) of seven (7) residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility could not provide documentation that Resident #5 had received a shower during their admission, Resident #10 did not receive incontinence care in a timely manner, and Resident #11 was observed on multiple occasions to have unwanted facial hair.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible and did not ensure adequate supervision and assistive devices were provided to prevent accidents for three (3) (Residents #8, #10 and #11) of four (4) residents reviewed. Specifically, Residents #8, #10, and #11 had medical orders for mechanically altered diets and were observed to have been eating food provided by the facility of the incorrect texture and consistency.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for five (5) (Residents #1, #8, #9, #10, and #13) of seven (7) residents reviewed. Specifically, there was no documented evidence that Residents #1, #8, #10 and #13 received multiple significant ordered medications over the course of several days including but not limited to insulin (used to treat high blood sugar levels), anti-rejection medications (used for kidney and pancreas transplants), anticoagulants (blood thinner), anti-seizure medications (used to treat myoclonic jerks), cardiac medications (used to treat heart conditions), antibiotics (used to treat infections), and bronchodilators (a medication used to treat coughing, difficulty breathing or chest tightness). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the interdisciplinary team determined the resident's right to self-administer medications was clinically appropriate for one (1) (Resident #1) of one (1) residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #1 was found to have been managing their diabetes with their own supplies including self-supplied insulin (a medication used to regulate blood glucose levels) and a continuous glucose monitoring system (a device implanted into the skin that monitors blood sugar in real-time), and the facility could not provide documented evidence that they appropriately assessed the resident to self-administer insulins. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the development of a comprehensive, person-centered care plan with measurable goals, timeframes, and interventions for three (3) (Residents #1, #8, and #10) of 14 residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #1 was prescribed insulin (a medication used to regulate blood glucose levels), Resident #8 had an indwelling urinary catheter (device that is inserted into the bladder to drain urine from the body), and Resident #10 required frequent incontinence care, and none of the residents' care plans included associated goals or interventions to address risks and care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a pressure ulcer received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed (Resident #10). Specifically, Resident #10 had an unstageable (a wound where full-thickness skin and tissue loss has occurred, but the true depth of the damage cannot be determined because it is covered by dead tissue) pressure ulcer to the sacral area with a physician order for daily wound packing and dressing. Resident #10 was observed without wound packing or a dressing in place for over two (2) hours after staff were notified, while the resident was incontinent of urine and stool.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food and drink were provided that was at a safe and appetizing temperature for one (1) of one (1) test tray and for one (1) (Resident #9) interviewed. Specifically, food and beverages during the meal were served at suboptimal temperatures and were not palatable.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, a liquid substance drained from the kitchen sink plumbing onto the floor during tray line (lunch meals were being prepared for the residents) and staff did not wash their hands in-between glove use or prior to touching ready to eat food after cleaning up the liquid on the floor. Additionally, the dumbwaiter (a small freight elevator used for moving items, such as food) was dirty, dried white debris was seen around the ice machine grate, and an ice scoop was observed resting inside a cooler of ice.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain a Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee consisting at a minimum of the Director of Nursing Services, the Medical Director or his/her designee, at least three (3) other members of the facility's staff, one (1) of who must be an individual in a leadership role, and the Infection Preventionist. Specifically, the facility could not provide documented evidence that the Infection Preventionist attended the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meetings on a regular basis (quarterly).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases for one (1) (Resident #10) of seven (7) residents reviewed for activities of daily living. Specifically, facility staff did not perform hand hygiene after assisting Resident #10 with incontinence care and prior to touching multiple surfaces and equipment. In addition, the facility did not appropriately implement the use of Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP, an infection control strategy that uses gloves and gowns during high contact resident care to reduce the spread of infection) for Resident #10, who had a wound, and staff were observed not using personal protective equipment (PPE; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 08/21/2024 to 08/27/2024, for six (Residents #11, #24, #27, #29, #33, and #38) of six residents reviewed for Baseline Care Plans, the facility did not ensure that a Baseline Care Plan (developed within 48 hours of admission and included minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for the immediate needs of the residents, that they were able to understand) was created in a timely manner or that a summary was provided to the residents and/or resident representatives. Specifically, for Residents #11, #24, #29, #33, and #38 there was no evidence the facility completed a Baseline Care Plan upon admission. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 08/21/2024 to 08/27/2024, for three of three observations of suction machines, the facility did not ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible. Specifically, suction machines were not prepared to be used in case of an aspiration emergency on units with residents at risk for aspiration.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (NY00351141) from 08/21/2024 to 08/27/2024, the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for all residents in the facility. Specifically, there was not sufficient staff to meet all resident needs in activities of daily living, including timely showers, long waits for addressing call lights, assistance with activities of daily living (eating, toileting, personal hygiene), and complete necessary documentation for resident transfers and discharges. This is evidenced by, but not limited to, the following: For additional information see Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services Form 2567: F677- Activities of Daily Living Care for Dependent Residents. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey completed 08/21/2024 through 08/27/2024, for one of one main kitchen, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, a potentially hazardous food item was not properly thawed, and potentially hazardous foods were not held cold at or below 45 degrees Fahrenheit (°F).
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (NY00351141) from 08/21/2024 to 08/27/2024, for one (Resident #191) of one resident reviewed for a discharge to the hospital, the facility did not ensure the transfer or discharge was appropriately documented in the resident's medical record to include the basis and necessity for the transfer, the receiving heath care institution, physician notification, and documentation of the discharge. Specifically, there was no documentation of a discharge summary, nursing assessment, change in condition to explain why the resident was transferred or discharged , or to where they were discharged . This is evidenced by the following: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (NY00342410) from 08/21/2024 to 08/27/2024, for two (Residents #5 and #26) of five residents, the facility did not ensure that residents who were dependent on staff for assistance received the necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene. Specifically, Resident #5 did not receive assistance with showering and washing their hair. Resident #26 did not receive assistance with showering, shaving, or obtaining a haircut. This is evidenced by the following: Review of the facility's Daily Staffing Sheets instructed that all staff are responsible for completing resident care tasks to include cleaning and cutting nails, shaving, and hair combing. 1. Resident #5 had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's dementia, hypertension, and chronic pain syndrome. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 08/21/2024 to 08/27/2024, for one (cart two) of two medication carts reviewed, the facility did not ensure all medications were stored and labeled in accordance with acceptable professional standards. Specifically, four medication cups that contained medications that had been pre-poured (medications that are prepared in advance and stored until the time of adminstration), were in the medication cart drawer uncovered and only labeled with room numbers. This is evidenced by the following: During observations on 08/26/2024 at 3:50 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse #2 was at medication cart two. The top drawer was open and contained four medication cups each containing multiple pills. The medication cups were labeled with room numbers only. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for one of one main kitchen, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Standard Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (#NY00292292) completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for three (Canandaigua, Honeoye, and [NAME] Lanes) of three resident units and one of one basement the facility did not provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior. Specifically, boxes of medical supplies were stored on the floor, walls, ceilings and floors were dirty and in disrepair, pooling water was present, privacy curtains were inadequate, handwash sinks were in disrepair or not present in soiled holding locations, an electrical breaker was damaged, and a door was damaged.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for one (Canandaigua) of three resident units, the facility did not ensure that the resident environment remained free of accident hazards. Specifically, hot water temperatures exceeding 120 degrees (°) Fahrenheit (F) were accessible to residents at point of use.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, conducted during the Recertification Survey, completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for one of one main kitchen, the facility did not provide food and drink that was palatable, attractive and at a safe and appetizing temperature. Specifically, the food was not served at safe and appetizing temperatures. This is evidenced by the following: When requested, the facility was unable to provide Food Service policies related to safe and appetizing temperatures for food and drinks. Review of the facility's resident scheduled mealtimes directed that breakfast was at 8:00 a.m., lunch was at 12:00 p.m., and dinner was at 5:00 p.m. During observations on 10/19/22 of the lunch meal, the meal cart arrived on the resident unit at 1:35 p.m. At 1:45 p.m., staff were observed bringing the last meal tray on the cart to a resident's room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for one of four residents reviewed for medication administration, the facility did not ensure that residents were appropriate for self-administration of medications. Specifically, Resident #22 had medications left at the bedside without a nurse present to supervise and without the resident being assessed and care planned for safe self-administration. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy, Self-Administration of Drugs at the Bedside, dated 7/26/22, included: 1. The care planning team will assess each resident's mental, physical, and visual ability to determine if the resident is capable of safe self-administration. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews, conducted during a Recertification Survey, completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that the facility did not ensure for two (Residents #24 and #29) of 42 residents reviewed, that the residents had the right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive that would be honored. Specifically, Resident #24's Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form and Resident #29's medical orders for code status in the electronic medical record (EMR) were not updated to reflect each resident's current wishes for code status. The facility policy Advanced Directives, dated revised on 7/15/21, included that the social worker (SW) or licensed designee would review or initiate a MOLST form upon admission. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for one (Resident #24) of one resident reviewed for hospitalizations, the facility did not ensure a written notification, which specifies the duration of the bed-hold policy, was provided to the resident and/or the resident representative at the time of transfer to the hospital or as soon after as possible. Specifically, Resident #24 was transferred to the hospital and the facility could not provide evidence that a written notice of information regarding the facility's bed-hold policy was provided to the resident or the resident's representatives at the time of transfer or soon after per the regulation. This was evidenced by the following: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for two (Canandaigua Hall and Honeoye Hall) of two medication carts reviewed, the facility did not ensure that all drugs and biologicals were properly labeled and stored in accordance with State and Federal laws. Specifically, both medication carts were observed to be unlocked and unsupervised, and contained multiple medications that were easily accessible to residents, visitors, and facility staff. This is evidenced by the following: The facility policy Medication Storage Of, dated 3/22/22, included that all compartments containing drugs and biologicals are locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items are not left unattended. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews conducted during a Recertification Survey completed on 10/24/22, it was determined that for one (Resident #7) of one observation of wound care, the facility did not maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of infections. Specifically, the nurse did not ensure that appropriate and sanitary equipment was used when providing wound care. This was evidenced by the following: The facility policy, Infection Control Prevention policy, dated 5/31/22, included standard precautions are the practices used to prevent transmission of infectious disease and protect health care workers and residents from the exposure to infectious material. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews during the Recertification Survey, it was determined for one (Resident #11) of one resident reviewed for care planning, the facility did not ensure that each resident was given the right, along with their representative, to participate in the care planning process with their interdisciplinary team members. Specifically, there was no evidence that the resident or their representative had an interdisciplinary care plan meeting following admission to the facility. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Stage IV lung cancer, dementia, uncontrolled diabetes and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 7/29/20, revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that the facility did not provide the residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene for one of five residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #5 was observed for four days with nails that were uncut, jagged and filled with brown debris. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #5 had diagnoses including, malignant neoplasm of the bladder with chronic indwelling urinary catheter, chronic obstructive lung disease and sepsis. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 7/20/20, included that the resident was cognitively intact and had moderately impaired vision. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews during the Recertification Survey and complaint investigation (#NY00246752), it was determined that the facility did not provide necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new pressure ulcers from developing for one of two residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #15 did not have dressing changes done according to wound clinic recommendations. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #15 had diagnoses including diabetes, peripheral vascular disease and an unstageable pressure ulcer of the right heel. The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 9/2/20, included that the resident was cognitively intact. In an interview on 10/27/20 at 9:26 a.m., the resident stated that they had a sore on their right heel for months and it was starting to heal. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews during the Recertification Survey, it was determined that for one of three residents reviewed, the facility did not ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible. Specifically, Resident #15 was being transferred with a stand-up lift despite a previous fall with one and contrary to therapy recommendations. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #15 had diagnoses including heart failure, morbid obesity and a history of a leg fracture following a fall from a stand-up lift approximately five months ago (May 2020). The Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 9/2/20, included that the resident was cognitively intact and required total dependence on staff for transfers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews during the Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure that each resident received the proper respiratory treatment and care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered-care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for one of three residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #18 was receiving continuous oxygen with no physician order, and oxygen use was not addressed in the person-centered-care plan. This is evidenced by the following: Resident #18 has diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, a history of COVID-19, and was dependent on oxygen. The Minimum Data Set Assessments, dated 9/20/20 and 10/22/20, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and received oxygen therapy while a resident. [...]
17 fire safety citations on file: 4 on August 27, 2024, 11 on October 24, 2022, 2 on November 2, 2020.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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 York | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 2.84 | 3.63 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.45 | 0.71 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.54 | 3.18 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.62 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.77 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 85.7% | 40.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 75.0% | 39.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 3 |
CMS expects 3.71 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 2.96 on weekdays and 2.54 on weekends, 14% 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 2.85 in April to June 2025 to 2.84 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 | 2.84 | 0.45 | 2.96 | 2.54 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 41 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.77 | 0.40 | 2.85 | 2.55 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 40 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.75 | 0.41 | 2.84 | 2.50 | 3.1% | 0 of 92 | 41 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.85 | 0.42 | 2.94 | 2.65 | 18.2% | 0 of 91 | 39 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| New York, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.55 | 0.68 | 3.72 | 3.13 | 9.8% | 0.1% 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 York, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $23.36 | $21.04 to $24.99 | 87,990 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $32.30 | $29.52 to $37.00 | 39,400 |
| Registered nurses | $52.62 | $45.60 to $62.34 | 205,810 |
| 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 York | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.8 | 14.1 | 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 | 0.0 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 21.9 | 12.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 6.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 13.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 28.5 | 20.6 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.8 | 9.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Elm Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.3% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · New York: 101 better, 157 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. 43 eligible stays.
10.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · New York: 12 better, 5 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. 41 eligible stays.
6.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · New York: 7 better, 21 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. 28 eligible stays.
60.8% this home
Median of homes: New York60.6% · 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. 79 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: New York0.6% · 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.
1.9% this home
Median of homes: New York2.0% · 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.
70.4% this home
Median of homes: New York98.5% · 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. 27 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: ILF OPERATING LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grinspan, Aryeh | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 15% | 12/13/2017 |
| Mayer, Abraham | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 10% | 12/13/2017 |
| Mayer, Giorgio | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 75% | 12/13/2017 |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 12/13/2017 | |
| Mackenzie, Martin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/10/2025 | |
| Mensah, Seth | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2025 | |
| Licht, Tzvi | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2025 | |
| Rubin, Baila | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/10/2025 | |
| Rubin, Shoshana | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/03/2025 | |
| Omega Business Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/13/2023 | |
| Rf SNF Ny Holdco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/12/2023 | |
| Fried, Joel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/12/2023 | |
| Mackenzie, Martin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/10/2025 | |
| Mensah, Seth | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/10/2025 | |
| Rutner, Abraham | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/12/2023 | |
| Rutner, Israel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/12/2023 |
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.
Licensed assisted living homes in the same town or within 5 miles, each with its New York inspection record.
These are the official offices in New York. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.