Home / New York / Far Rockaway
13 11 Virginia Street, Far Rockaway, NY 11691 · Queens County · (718) 327-2909
100 certified beds, about 97 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1973
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 335044 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 3, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the New York average is 8.1, the national average 9.2).
None of its 25 health citations since June 2022 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 0.36 of those hours.
41.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (New York average 40.3%).
CMS links it to Centers Health Care, an affiliated group of 36 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 25 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review during survey, the facility failed to ensure that preadmission screening for individuals with a mental disorder and individuals with intellectual disability was conducted prior to their admission to the facility. This was identified for one (Resident #74) of 37 23 residents reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (a federal requirement to ensure that residents were not inappropriately placed in a skilled nursing facility). Specifically, Resident # 74 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had an inaccurate and incomplete Level I Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review screen dated 7/31/2024. Items 23 through 26 of the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review form were not completed prior to admission. Response to Items 23 through 26 would determine if a Level II evaluation was required.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews during survey, the facility failed to ensure that a comprehensive person-centered care plan was implemented for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet each resident's medical and nursing needs. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #5) of three (3) residents reviewed for positioning/mobility. Specifically, the facility did not ensure implementation of care plan interventions for Resident #5 related to bilateral upper extremity contractures, which included the use of hand positioning devices. Resident #5 was observed on multiple occasions without the required intervention in place, and there was no documented evidence of refusal of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure services provided or arranged by the facility met the current professional standards of quality. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #20) of one resident reviewed for tube feeding. Specifically, Resident #20 was not administered the full amount of 1200 milliliters of feeding formula as per physician orders. Additionally, Licensed Practical Nurse #2, the 7:00 AM-3:00 PM nurse did not confirm and erroneously documented that Resident #20 received the total amount of their enteral feed. Cross Reference:
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews during survey, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment, care, and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding. This was identified for one (1) (Resident #20) of one resident reviewed for tube feeding. Specifically, Resident #20 has a physician's order to receive 1200 milliliters of enteral feed (the delivery of nutrients through a feeding tube directly into the stomach or small intestine) daily in the evenings. On 03/31/2026, Resident #20 did not receive the required amount of the enteral feed as Licensed Practical Nurse # 4, the 11:00 PM - 7:00AM shift nurse, discontinued the tube feeding prior to completion of the required amount. The enteral feed was not resumed until concern was brought forward by the survey team.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles on one (Unit 1) of two nursing units. Specifically, during an observation of a medication cart on Unit 1 on 04/02/2026, there were two vials of insulin that did not have resident names on them; two vials of insulin for Resident #93 with no open date; and one insulin vial for Resident #62 that was first opened on 02/26/2026 and was not discarded after 28 days.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure it maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development of communicable diseases and infections for 1) one (Resident #85) of four residents observed during medication administration; and 2) one of two nursing units observed during the medication storage task. Specifically, 1) during the medication pass observation for Resident #85, Licensed Practical Nurse #1 handled two tablets of Sennosides (a laxative for constipation) with their bare hands after popping the tablets out of the blister pack. The nurse proceeded to administer the tablets to the resident; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during a Recertification survey from 07/21/24 to 07/25/24, the facility did not ensure that housekeeping and maintenance services were provided to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. Specifically multiple areas were observed to have broken blinds, mishung privacy curtains, furniture which was soiled and in disrepair, warped and loose floor tiles, resident equipment in disrepair, room sinks not firmly affixed to wall and torn, and frayed and stained clean linen cart covers. This was evident in 2 of 3 Units. (Units South and North)
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure a resident, or their designated representative was provided appropriate notification at the termination of Medicare Part A benefits. This was evident for 1 (Resident #73) of 3 residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notification out of 28 total sampled residents. Specifically, the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage were not mailed out to Resident #73's designated representatives on the same day as telephone notification.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 07/21/2024 through 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents' privacy was maintained. This was evident for 2 of 2 residents (#23 & #27) reviewed for Privacy out of 28 sampled residents. Specifically, Licensed Practical Nurses were observed performing blood glucose monitoring and insulin administration in the hallway.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/26/2024, the facility did not ensure a person-centered comprehensive care plan was developed and implemented to meet a resident's needs. This was evident for 1 (Resident #87) of 1 resident reviewed for Communication/Sensory out of 28 sampled residents. Specifically, there was no care plan created for Resident #87 who had concerns with vision.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification and survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure services provided met professional standards. This was evident for 1 (Resident #27) out of 29 total sampled residents. Specifically, Licensed Practical Nurse #4 was observed conducting blood glucose monitoring and then failing to administer insulin as per the doctor's order. The facility policy and procedure titled Blood Glucose Testing, Meter/Device Use revised 02/01/2024 states that the first step of blood glucose testing using the meter is to verify a healthcare provider's order for the procedure. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews, and interviews, conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure that a resident received care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent infection and promote healing. This was evident for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #7) reviewed for Pressure Ulcer Injury out of a total of 28 sampled residents. Specifically, during wound care observation, Resident #7 did not receive the physician ordered pressure ulcer treatment and Licensed Practical Nurse #1 failed to maintain infection prevention standards.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure timely identification and removal of expired medications. Specifically, a bag containing 8 syringes of Lorazepam gel with an expiration date of 12/29/2021 and 44 capsules of Dronabinol with an expiration date of 01/26/2024 were located in the refrigerator narcotics box in the South Unit medication room. Additionally, narcotics were not being stored in permanently affixed cabinets in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure that all residents were free of significant medication errors. Specifically, Resident #27 did not receive insulin in accordance with Physician's Orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure medications and biologicals were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. This was evident for 1 of 3 medication storage carts (South Unit medication cart) observed. Specifically, 3 open insulin vials did not contain the date opened on the vials, 1 opened vial of insulin did not contain a resident's name on the box or vial, and 3 inhalers did not contain the date opened or the resident's name on the inhaler devices.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews during the Recertification survey from 07/21/2024 to 07/25/2024, the facility did not ensure each resident received food that accommodated their allergies, intolerances, and preferences. This was evident for 1 (Resident #80) of 2 residents reviewed for food out of a sampe of 28 residents. Specifically, Resident #80 received lunch trays that included foods that did not accommodate their documented preferences.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during a Recertification survey from 07/21/24 to 07/25/24, the facility did not ensure that infection control practices were maintained during multiple lunch meal observations. Specifically, during two lunch meal observations in the Main Dining Room, Certified Nurse Assistants (Certified Nurse Assistant # 6 & Certified Nurse Assistant #1) were observed assisting multiple residents in the dining room with hand hygiene. The Certified Nurse Assistants did not wear gloves, provided residents with hand sanitizing wipes, collected used hand sanitizing wipes, and assisted other residents without performing hand hygiene between resident contact.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during a Recertification survey from 07/21/24 to 07/25/24, the facility did not ensure that a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment was provided for staff and the public Specifically, furniture in the nursing station was soiled, dirty, and in disrepair, visitor and staff bathrooms were in disrepair.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that an effective pest control program was in place. Specifically, multiple flies were observed during the initial and subsequent tours of the North/South/Hallway Units, Nurse Station. The finding is: The policy and procedure titled Pest Control revised 11/2023, documented that the facility would maintain an ongoing pest control program to ensure the building is kept free of pests and rodents. The policy also documented that Pest Control service visit documentation will be kept on file in the facility, and screens would be maintained for facility windows. During multiple observations conducted from 07/21/24 to 07/25/24 the following was observed: 1.) Multiple flies were observed during initial and subsequent tours of resident rooms, nurse station, dining room area. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment was maintained. This was evident in 17 (1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 35, 41, 42, 46) residnt rooms of the North Wing (NW) and South Wing (SW) and in facility common areas. Specifically, there were items in disrepair, cracked, and broken, and the facility floors and walls were stained, emitting a foul odor, and cracked and peeling.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure reasonable accommodation of needs were provided to residents. This was evident for 2 (Resident #10 and #81) of 27 sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #10 and Resident #81 were observed to have their call bells out of reach.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey completed on 6/22/22, the facility did not ensure a resident's right to personal privacy was maintained. This was evident for 1 (Resident #5) of 27 sampled residents. Specifically, resident #5 was observed on multiple occasions without a privacy curtain around their bed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interviews during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the infection prevention and control program was designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to help prevent the spread, development, and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, including the development and transmission of COVID-19 infection. This was evidenced for 1 (Resident #346) of 35 sampled residents. Specifically, (1) the facility tested visitors for COVID-19 without donning full Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) consisting of gloves, masks, shield and gown and without maintaining a 6 foot distance; (2) Staff were observed not donning full PPE when caring for Resident #346 who was on contact isolation; (3) did not have a comprehensive Legionella Water Management Plan (LWMP).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a resident was adequately equipped to call for assistance. This was evident for 1 (Resident #10) of 8 residents reviewed for Physical Environment out of a total of 35 sampled residents. Specifically, Resident #10 was observed without an operating call bell in place.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a safe, functional, sanitary and comfortable environment was provided for residents, staff and the public. This was evident in 1 (North Wing) of 2 wings of the facility. Specifically, common areas accessible to staff, residents, and the visitors were observed in disrepair and soiled.
18 fire safety citations on file: 6 on April 3, 2026, 4 on July 26, 2024, 8 on June 22, 2022.
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 | 0.36 | 0.71 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.58 | 3.18 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.77 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.71 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.8% | 40.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 46.2% | 39.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.65 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 2.94 on weekdays and 2.58 on weekends, 12% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 59.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.15 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 | 0.36 | 2.94 | 2.58 | 59.8% | 0 of 90 | 97 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.73 | 0.22 | 2.80 | 2.54 | 57.4% | 0 of 92 | 97 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.93 | 0.28 | 3.05 | 2.62 | 53.1% | 0 of 92 | 97 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.15 | 0.26 | 3.27 | 2.83 | 52.6% | 0 of 91 | 99 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 4.1 | 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 | 1.0 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 12.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.9 | 6.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.8 | 13.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.2 | 20.6 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.0 | 9.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Far Rockaway Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 11 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 33 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 24 eligible stays.
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 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. 8 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 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. 16 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 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. 16 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 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. 1 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: ROCKAWAY OPERATIONS ASSOCIATES LLC. CMS links this home to Centers Health Care, a group of 36 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rockaway Kr Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 98% | 04/05/2017 |
| Rozenberg, Kenneth | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 97% | 04/01/2014 |
| Goldman, Nathan | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Hendrix, Heidi | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Lantzitsky, Aharon | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Rozenberg, Kenneth | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2014 | |
| Blumenfeld, Sol | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/25/2019 | |
| Lati, Zev | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2026 | |
| Rozenberg, Beth | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 10/28/2025 | |
| Abramchik, Amir | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2014 | |
| Blumenfeld, Sol | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2019 | |
| Lati, Zev | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2026 |
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.