Home / Connecticut / Southbury
990 North Main Street, Southbury, CT 06488 · Naugatuck Vly County · (203) 264-9135
120 certified beds, about 116 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1991
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 075371 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 17, 2025, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Connecticut average is 13.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 36 health citations since July 2021, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.25 hours per resident per day, against 3.73 across Connecticut and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.63 of those hours.
49.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Connecticut average 37.4%).
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 36 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, facility documentation and facility policy, and interviews for one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure staff responded appropriately to wander guard alarms and failed to ensure staff visually verified residents before re-setting alarms, resulting in the resident leaving the nursing unit without staff knowledge. Further, the facility failed to maintain a secured exit door in proper working order and failed to ensure staff searched for a resident timely when an exit door alarm sounded, resulting in Resident #1 exiting the facility without staff knowledge or supervision. The failures resulted in the finding of Immediate Jeopardy.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility documentation review, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to act timely when therapy recommended to change the resident transfer status.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility documentation review, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a resident with dementia who was known to require assistance with transfers and only able to ambulate with therapy, was transferred without injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for an allegation of misappropriation of resident property, the facility failed to safeguard a resident's personal valuables when Resident #1's cash money was removed from the facility's safe.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, policies, and interviews, for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #4) reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to ensure the receiving provider's acceptance prior to transfer and failed to provide the receiving health care facility with the resident's discharge summary before the resident's arrival. Resident #4 had diagnoses that included anoxic brain damage, dementia with behavioral disturbance, fracture of the upper end of the left humerus, atrial fibrillation, malignant neoplasm of the prostate, and dysphagia. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #4) reviewed for discharge, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for discharge.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record and policy review, the facility failed to post and provide information or means to file a grievance and follow up on grievances.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews for 30 residents reviewed for placement on a secured unit, the facility failed to identify required clinical criteria for placement on the unit, failed to develop a policy for the secured unit, and failed to document that information for independent egress had been provided to appropriate residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 4 of 4 residents (Resident #24, Resident #54, Resident #63, Resident #76) observed to be eating their meals in the hallway, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to notify the provider of a positive orthostatic blood pressure for a resident on a new antipsychotic medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and facility policy for one sample resident (Resident #24) reviewed for mistreatment, the facility failed to notify the State Agency in a timely manner of an injury of unknown origin.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #310) reviewed for positioning, the facility failed to offload heels for a resident at high risk for pressure ulcer development.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to prevent a fall for a resident at risk for falls who required assistance with ambulation.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, facility documentation, and policy review for medication storage , the facility failed to ensure bi-monthly audits of controlled medications were completed. Review of the facilities bi-monthly narcotic audit sheets for [NAME], C1 South, C2 South, and C2 North medication carts identified they were not completed for May 2025 and June 2025. Interview and facility documentation review with the Director of Nurses (DNS) on 6/16/25 at 12:34 PM identified that the bi-monthly audits of controlled medications for [NAME], C1 South, C2 South, and C2 North medication carts were not completed for May 2025 and June 2025. It was identified that it was the responsibility of the DNS to ensure they were completed and although she knew they should be completed, she had forgotten to complete. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for unnecessary medication, the facility failed to change or discontinue a psychotropic medication after extended nonuse of the medication, failed to document the duration and rationale for extension of an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication extended beyond 14 days.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, review of the clinical record, and facility policy for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to provide adaptive equipment per the physician's order for a resident with dysphagia and malnutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for behaviors, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified when the resident was restless and agitated.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for restraints, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free of a physical restraint.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, interviews and facility policy for one resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #1), the facility failed to ensure the resident was treated with dignity and respect.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, interviews and facility policy for one resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #1), the facility failed to ensure staff reported an allegation of abuse timely.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility documentation review, interviews and facility policy review for one resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #1), the facility failed ensure care was provided in accordance with the plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for change of condition, the facility failed to notify the resident representative when there was a change of condition and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #261) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to notify the physician when medication was not available for administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #35) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to report an abuse allegation in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #35) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation of an abuse allegation.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 1 resident's (Resident #7) reviewed for care planning, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was in place.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #261) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice by verifying the identity of the resident before administering medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for change of condition, the facility failed to do an RN assessment with a change in condition and for 1 resident (Resident #78 ) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to follow physicians orders for daily weights and for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #261) reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to administer medication per physicians order.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #6 and 263) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing and humidifier canisters were changed weekly and dated, and that a sign that oxygen was in use was posted on the resident's doors per policy.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews the facility failed to conduct annual performance evaluations for 3 of 3 nurse aides.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interview for 2 of 3 medication storage rooms, the facility failed to maintain the rooms in a secure manner and according to policy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility policy and interviews the facility failed to wear hair restraints while in the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #24) reviewed for edeka, the facility failed to notify the physician when the resident refused an ordered treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, and interviews for 1 resident (Resident #24) reviewed for edema, the facility failed to provide treatment for lower extremity edema.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation facility policy and interviews for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #37) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to implement measures as documented in the plan of care to prevent falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility documentation and interview the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control related to hand washing.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #24), reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to obtain Pneumococcal and Prevnar 13 vaccination history and failed to administer the Prevnar 13 vaccine.
22 fire safety citations on file: 8 on June 17, 2025, 12 on August 29, 2023, 2 on July 20, 2021.
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 | Connecticut | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.25 | 3.73 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.63 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.69 | 3.37 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.64 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.98 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 49.2% | 37.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 52.6% | 38.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.66 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.47 on weekdays and 3.69 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 16.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.48 in April to June 2025 to 4.25 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 | 4.25 | 0.63 | 4.47 | 3.69 | 16.3% | 0 of 90 | 116 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.20 | 0.70 | 4.47 | 3.50 | 15.0% | 0 of 92 | 115 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.17 | 0.70 | 4.43 | 3.52 | 12.4% | 0 of 92 | 114 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.48 | 0.79 | 4.72 | 3.85 | 4.4% | 0 of 91 | 110 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Connecticut, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.66 | 0.61 | 3.80 | 3.31 | 6.0% | 1.3% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Connecticut, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $21.53 | $20.14 to $22.68 | 21,380 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $35.43 | $32.05 to $36.94 | 8,540 |
| Registered nurses | $49.39 | $41.40 to $58.58 | 40,110 |
| 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 | Connecticut | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 28.3 | 17.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.5 | 16.4 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.3 | 4.0 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 16.8 | 17.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 29.8 | 24.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.2 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Lutheran Home of Southbury Inc's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (62.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
62.6% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Connecticut: 75 better, 2 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. 212 eligible stays.
9.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Connecticut: 0 better, 3 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. 230 eligible stays.
7.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Connecticut: 0 better, 2 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. 166 eligible stays.
61.8% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut58.9% · 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. 131 residents counted.
0.5% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut0.0% · 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. 197 residents counted.
1.4% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut1.6% · 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. 197 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Connecticut100.0% · 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. 63 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: LUTHERAN HOME OF SOUTHBURY INC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bartholomew, Alexander | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Browne, Tara | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Bartholomew, Alexander | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Cowlagi, Ashish | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Goodman, Ross | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2013 | |
| Mayo, William | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2014 | |
| Robertson, Keith | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Bovill, Angela | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2018 | |
| Hanscom, Kristin | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Oneal, Gary | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Russo, Nicholas | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2014 | |
| Tappan, Christine | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Ascentria Care Alliance Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/08/2015 | |
| Baroody, Ziad | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Bovill, Angela | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2014 | |
| Khan, Ghulam | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Ascentria Care Alliance Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/25/2025 | |
| Baroody, Ziad | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Bovill, Angela | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/02/2025 | |
| Browne, Tara | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/14/2024 | |
| Hanscom, Kristin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/30/2024 | |
| Khan, Ghulam | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Oneal, Gary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/14/2024 | |
| Russo, Nicholas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/02/2025 | |
| Tappan, Christine | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/14/2024 |
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 Connecticut. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.