255 Possum Park Road, Newark, DE 19711 · New Castle County · (302) 366-0160
110 certified beds, about 92 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1982
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 085021 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 12, 2026, inspectors cited 24 health deficiencies (the Delaware average is 10.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 54 health citations since October 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 4 fines totaling $56,814 in the last three years; the largest was $16,448, and the latest is dated June 25, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.51 hours per resident per day, against 4.35 across Delaware and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.67 of those hours.
38.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Delaware average 41.3%).
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 54 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that one (R1) of three residents sampled did not receive adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent elopement, as R1 is a newly admitted resident identified as an elopement risk. This failure resulted in R1 eloping from the facility to a busy road between approximately 5:00 PM and 5:20 PM without supervision or intervention. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified to the facility on 6/25/26 at 10:00 AM and was determined to be past noncompliance as of 6/16/26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for R22, an independent resident who told multiple staff prior to the incident that he wanted to go home. On 11/10/25, R22 self-ambulated his wheelchair from the healthcare area to the independent living front lobby entrance and exited the building without staff knowledge. R22 continued down a main traffic road where the speed limit was 45 miles per hour for 0.3 of a mile and then called 911 where police officers responded. As a result of the inadequate supervision, R22's elopement from 4:50 AM to 5:21 AM had the potential to have a serious outcome, injury or death. An immediate jeopardy past non-compliance was called on 1/8/26 at 9:57 AM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and facility record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it had a documented and updated facility assessment that included the conditions in the addendum.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to handle, store, process, and transport laundry in a manner that prevents cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (R3, R22, R28 and R94) out of four residents reviewed for care planning, the facility failed to ensure the care planning process facilitated the inclusion of the resident and/or resident representative in the development and implementation of each residents' person-centered care plan.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served in a manner that prevents foodborne illness to the residents, in reference to the FDA Food Code.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (R3, R4, R39, R87) out of six reviewed for infection control, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program that obtained and documented on the monthly line listing the organism being treated by antibiotics.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for seven (E14, E15, E16, E17, E18, E20 and E21) out of seven facility staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for four (E16, E18, E20, and E21) out of four facility staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required Corporate Compliance and Ethics training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for seven (E14, E15, E16, E17, E18, E20 and E21) out of seven facility staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required Behavioral Health Care Needs training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that for one (R92) out of 32 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure that R92 was treated with dignity and respect.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for three (R22, R80 and R106) out of four residents reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to allow these residents to exercise their right to self-determination by having their family contact representatives sign consents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R106) out of eighteen residents reviewed for quality of care, the facility failed to notify family representative of the resident's 8/1/25 lab work.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R6) out of one resident reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to ensure that R6 had home health services arranged per the discharge plan from the facility to home on [DATE] (Friday).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R46) out of one resident reviewed for PASARR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review), the facility failed to complete MDS assessments to accurately reflect changes in R46's behavior and medication status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R94) out of two residents reviewed for catheters and one (R91) out of three residents reviewed for ADLs (Activities of Daily Living), the facility failed to ensure that a person-centered care plan was developed to address each residents' identified needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R80) out of four residents reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to review and revise the resident's care plan.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interview, it was determined that for one (R80) out of four residents reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to provide care consistent with professional standards as the supplemental oxygen tubing was out-of-date.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R22) out of four residents reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure that R22 received medically-related social services, when it was determined that the resident lacked capacity for medical decision making in F6's (MD) progress note dated 11/10/25.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R3) out of two residents reviewed for dental services, the facility failed to provide or obtain from an outside resource, R3's routine dental services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and facility record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it had a written transfer agreement in effect with one or more hospitals approved for participation in Medicare/Medicaid programs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and facility record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it has complied with the disclosure of ownership requirements.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R94) out of four residents reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure R94's bilateral bed rails were being included in a routine maintenance safety check.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for seven (E14, E15, E16, E17, E18, E19, and E21) out of seven facility staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required Communications training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and facility record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it has an active governing body that is responsible for establishing and implementing policies regarding the management of the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R1) out of four residents reviewed for pharmacy services, the facility failed to ensure R1 was free of a significant medication error. This failure resulted in a harm in which R1 seized and was transferred to the hospital on 8/7/25 with benzodiazepine withdrawal from missing four doses of lorazepam. Based on a review of the facility's corrective actions taken and completed on 8/8/25 at 11:20 PM, it was determined that this incident was past non-compliance.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (R1, R2, R3, R4) out of four residents reviewed for admission, the facility failed to provide services that meet the professional standard of quality as defined by the Delaware State Code regarding RN (registered nurse), LPN (licensed practical nurse) and NA (nurse aide)/ UA (unlicensed assistant) Duties for admission assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R1) out of four residents reviewed for Pharmacy services, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services that included acquiring and receiving a medication (lorazepam) to meet R1's needs during her 8/5/25 admission.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was served under sanitary conditions and failed to ensure the kitchen was kept in a clean and sanitary manner to prevent contamination from foreign substances and the potential for development of foodborne illnesses. This deficient practice has the potential to affect 89 of 91 residents who received meals and beverages prepared in and served from the facility's kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of 25 sampled residents (Resident(R) 18) was afforded the opportunity to be included in all aspects of person-centered care planning.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain the personal privacy of one resident (R3) during medication administration from a sample of 25 residents. This failure had the potential to cause embarrassment to the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide written notification of the bed hold policy to the resident and responsible party (RP) for one of five residents (Resident (R) 287) reviewed for hospitalization out of a total sample of 25. The failure had the potential to affect the residents planning on returning to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 22 out of 25 sampled residents had an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. This had the potential to cause the resident to have unmet care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to revise care plans for three of 25 sampled residents (R22, R65, and R70). The care plan for R22 was not revised to reflect his oxygen therapy. The care plan for R65 was not revised to reflect an incident of wandering into a female resident's room. R70's care plan was not revised to reflect the resident's urinary catheter. This failure had the potential to affect care provided to the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to increase the frequency of assessments when a resident was diagnosed with COVID-19 for one of three residents (Resident (R) 287) reviewed for COVID-19 infection out of a total sample of 25. The lack of assessment could result in the facility not noticing symptoms which warranted further treatment and intervention.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide supervision for one of five residents (Resident (R) 65) reviewed for supervision out of a total sample of 25. The failure had the potential to cause harm to R65 due to his behavior of wandering.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services for urinary catheters for one of three residents (Resident (R) 70) reviewed for urinary catheters out of a total sample of 25. The facility failed to have physician orders for the use of a urinary catheter and failed to ensure the drainage bag and tubing were not placed directly on the floor, inhibiting the proper flow of urine. The failure had the potential for the resident to develop reoccurring urinary tract infections (UTIs).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer oxygen at the physician prescribed dose for two of five residents (Residents (R) 9 and 22) reviewed for respiratory care out of a total sample of 25. This had the potential to cause the residents respiratory distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to document an end date for an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication for one of six residents (Resident (R) 294) reviewed for unnecessary medications out of a total sample of 25. The failure had the potential for residents to receive psychotropic medications without ongoing assessment by a physician or practitioner for continued appropriateness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews, interviews, and a review of facility policy, the facility failed to secure one of three (Second floor medication cart) medication carts on one of two nursing units. The facility failed to dispose of expired supplies in one of two (Second floor medication storage room) medication storage rooms. These failures had the potential to result in residents being subject to unsafe or ineffective treatment or adverse effects leading to more serious illnesses and could permit unauthorized access to residents' medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of other facility documentation it was determined that for three (R1, R2 and R3) out of three residents reviewed for wandering and elopement the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopements. R1 eloped on two occasions 8/16/24 and 8/18/24. On 8/16/24, R1 was seen in the parking lot. On 8/18/24, R1 was seen outside of the building, near the fire lane of the facility turn-in and a busy roadway. Additionally, R2 eloped from the facility on 8/17/24 and was found outside of the building at the edge of the curb on the rounded driveway. On 7/11/24, R3 was seen exiting the facility unattended by a facility visitor who immediately reported R3's elopement to staff. The facility was made aware on 8/23/27 at 4:47 PM of immediate jeopardy. All three residents were at risk for serious adverse outcome. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for three (R1, R2 and R3) out of three residents reviewed for elopements the facility failed to recognize the elopements as allegation's of neglect. This resulted in the failure to report them to the State Agency.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for seven (E8, E12, E15, E16, E21, E27 and E28) out of ten staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required Behavioral Health training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R3) out of three residents reviewed for elopement the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for six (E12, E15, E16, E21, E27 and E28) out of ten staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required QAPI (Quality Assurance And Performance Improvement) training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and review of facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to store foods in a sanitary manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility investigation, the facility failed to notify the physician of an elevated anticoagulant lab value in a timely manner for one resident (Resident (R) 14) reviewed for a significant medication error out of a total sample of 26 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure one of one residents (Resident (R) 50) reviewed for prevention of skin breakdown out of a total sample of 26 residents received padding to the skin as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide nursing services as ordered for one of three residents (Resident (R) 36) reviewed for application of splints out of a total sample of 26 residents. This failure had the potential to decrease physical functioning, quality of life, and independence.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to clean respiratory equipment for one of one resident (Residents (R) 65) reviewed for oxygen therapy out of a total sample of 26 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and personnel record review, the facility failed to ensure that a Certified Nursing Aid (CNA) was registered with the state of Delaware for one of five personnel records reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and personnel record review, the facility failed to ensure that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)1 received a yearly performance evaluation for one of five personnel records reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide the appropriate dosage of antibiotics upon admission for one of six residents (Resident (R) 176) reviewed for medication administration out of 26 sample residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record reviews, facility record reviews, and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure that one resident (Resident (R) 14) out of a total sample of 26 residents was free from significant medication errors. Specifically, R14 was erroneously administered Coumadin (anticoagulant medication) four mg (milligrams). This failure had the potential to increase the risk for bleeding, bruising, and death.
7 fire safety citations on file: 2 on January 12, 2026, 5 on November 26, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 25, 2026 | Fine | $16,355 |
| January 12, 2026 | Fine | $14,901 |
| October 29, 2025 | Fine | $9,110 |
| August 28, 2024 | Fine | $16,448 |
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) | 3.51 | 4.35 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.67 | 0.97 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.03 | 3.89 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.95 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.89 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 38.9% | 41.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 28.6% | 41.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.70 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 3.70 on weekdays and 3.03 on weekends, 18% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 2.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 5.08 in April to June 2025 to 3.51 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 | 3.51 | 0.67 | 3.70 | 3.03 | 2.7% | 0 of 90 | 92 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.46 | 0.87 | 4.72 | 3.80 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 89 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.56 | 0.97 | 4.85 | 3.84 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 88 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 5.08 | 0.99 | 5.43 | 4.20 | 1.0% | 0 of 91 | 88 |
| 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 | 10.9 | 12.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.9 | 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 | 11.5 | 13.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.2 | 3.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.2 | 10.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.5 | 23.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.1 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Encore at West Meadow L.L.C.'s Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (61.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
61.4% 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. 260 eligible stays.
10.7% 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. 279 eligible stays.
9.1% 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. 212 eligible stays.
56.0% 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. 218 residents counted.
0.4% 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. 271 residents counted.
2.9% 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. 270 residents counted.
98.3% 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. 173 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: Legal Business Name Not Available.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership data not available |
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.