Home / Connecticut / Trumbull
21 Maefair Court, Trumbull, CT 06611 · Greater Bridgeport County · (203) 459-5152
134 certified beds, about 126 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 075404 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 30, 2025, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Connecticut average is 13.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since July 2021, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $25,366 in the last three years; the largest was $17,345, and the latest is dated March 19, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.69 hours per resident per day, against 3.73 across Connecticut and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.59 of those hours.
30.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Connecticut average 37.4%).
CMS links it to National Health Care Associates, an affiliated group of 42 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 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, review of facility policy and interview for 1 sampled resident (Resident #368) reviewed for Advanced Directives, the facility failed to ensure the resident signed Advance Directives were reflected correctly on the Electronic Medical Record (EMR.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical reviews, observations and review of facility documentation and interviews for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for the environment (Resident #82), the facility did not provide a homelike environment by not ensuring personal care equipment was stored appropriately and for 1 of 2 residents ( Resident # 68) ) reviewed for Environment, the facility failed to ensure residents room was free from odors in order to ensure a home like environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, observation, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medication, the facility failed to ensure medication was administered according to physician's orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for 4 residents (Resident #38) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a safe transfer with a mechanical lift per manufacture specifications to prevent a potential accident.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure staff obtained weekly weights and a re-weight as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, the facility failed and staff interviews, the facility failed to discard expired medications in a timely manner and for 1 or 4 residents (Resident #7) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to adequately secure medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical reviews, observations, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident, (Resident #61) reviewed for dental services, the facility failed to follow up on a recommendation made by a physician regarding dental.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #96) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from neglect and failed to ensure care was provided timely.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #96) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure care was provided in accordance with the plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews for one of three residents (Resident #96) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure the record was complete and accurate to include incontinent care provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who had a history of wandering throughout the facility and self-propelled in a wheelchair, the facility failed to ensure the resident was accounted for after an alarmed door was triggered.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, review of facility documentation and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident # 2) who were reviewed for an allegation of abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from physical abuse by a staff member.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies, and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for elopement, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent the resident from exiting through a door that was ajar during a recreation activity. Resident #1 was observed outside in the parking lot by another resident. The failures resulted in a finding of Immediate Jeopardy.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility policies and interview for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who were reviewed for an allegation of abuse, the facility failed to ensure two (2) staff members were present in the room as outlined in the care plan.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 4 residents observed during medication administration, (Resident #30) the facility failed to notify the physician or APRN when the resident's medication was not administered as directed by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, facility policy review, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #113) reviewed for pressure injuries, the facility failed to ensure that the wound was initially assessed and assessed on a weekly basis by a registered nurse, failed to ensure that the wound specialist's treatment recommendation was implemented, and failed to ensure that a worsening wound was evaluated by the facility's wound specialist.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, facility policy review, and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #113) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure that the wound was appropriately assessed, failed to ensure that the initial treatment to the wound was appropriate, failed to ensure that appropriate ongoing assessments of the wound was provided prior to the wound worsening to the category of unstageable.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of facility's documentation and interviews for 2 of 3 sampled resident (Resident #35 & #89) reviewed for accidents and who required the assistance of two staff members for bed mobility, and the facility failed to ensure that the resident received the necessary assistance resulting in a fall from the bed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, review of facility policy, and interviews for 1 sampled resident, (Resident #59) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to follow the physician's order for the correct oxygen flow rate.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observations, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 sampled resident (Resident #17) reviewed for pain management, the facility failed to ensure proper pain management.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of clinical records, and interviews for 2 of 4 Residents (Resident #3 and #30) reviewed for Medication Administration, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as directed, per the physician's orders, and per professional standards to ensure a medication error rate less than 5%.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy, and interviews for the only resident (Resident #16), reviewed for self-administration of medications, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who was unable to self-administration medications did not store the medication at the bedside.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record and interviews for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #9), reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to notify the MD/APRN of an elevated serum level of a medication (Clozaril) in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #40) reviewed for the environment, the facility failed to provide an alternate means of calling for assistance when the bedside nurse call alert system failed to correctly operate.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, facility documentation, and interview for 6 of 6 units reviewed for narcotic reconciliation, the facility failed to conduct bimonthly narcotic audits per the regulation.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, and staff interviews for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #62) reviewed for unnecessary medication, the facility failed to ensure blood glucose monitoring was renewed upon Resident #62's re-admission, and for 2 sampled residents (Resident #76 and Resident #102) reviewed for skin conditions, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse assess a skin condition and failed to ensure that a Wound Physician's recommendation was responded to by Resident #102's physician/APRN.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for Advanced Directives, the facility failed to ensure advanced healthcare planning that included advanced directives was addressed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, and staff interviews for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #76) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure a treatment was completed to the right buttocks and failed to complete weekly assessments of the area. Resident #76 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a Stage 2 right buttock pressure ulcer, malignant neoplasm of the prostate and atrial fibrillation. A Pressure Injury Initial Evaluation form dated 5/15/21 identified Resident #76 had a Stage 2 right buttock pressure ulcer measuring 3 cm length by 3 cm width by 0.5 cm depth with a small amount of drainage. Treatment directed to apply Medi-Honey to the wound bed once daily followed by a dry protective dressing. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #64) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent a fall with injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, review of facility policy and staff interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure a clean field was established prior to a dressing change, to properly discard a contaminated dressing and failed to perform hand hygiene.
16 fire safety citations on file: 8 on July 27, 2023, 8 on July 1, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 19, 2025 | Fine | $17,345 |
| August 15, 2024 | Fine | $8,021 |
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 | Connecticut | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.69 | 3.73 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.59 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.26 | 3.37 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.08 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.01 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 30.8% | 37.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 28.6% | 38.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.85 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 3.86 on weekdays and 3.26 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.59 in April to June 2025 to 3.69 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 | 3.69 | 0.59 | 3.86 | 3.26 | 1.1% | 0 of 90 | 126 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.56 | 0.57 | 3.74 | 3.11 | 2.2% | 0 of 92 | 125 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.45 | 0.57 | 3.63 | 3.00 | 3.4% | 0 of 92 | 126 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.59 | 0.54 | 3.77 | 3.15 | 2.9% | 0 of 91 | 123 |
| 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.
| 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 | 10.5 | 17.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 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 | 2.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.9 | 16.4 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 4.0 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.5 | 17.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.9 | 24.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.6 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.8 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Maefair Center for Health & Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (48.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
48.6% this home
No different from 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. 112 eligible stays.
11.8% 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. 125 eligible stays.
9.1% 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. 77 eligible stays.
50.0% 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. 38 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 84 residents counted.
1.6% 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. 84 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: 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. 4 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: MAEFAIR ACQUISITION OPERATOR LLC. CMS links this home to National Health Care Associates, a group of 42 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bg II Opco Ml LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 10/10/2024 |
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Dymer Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ilana Ostreicher Family Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Juniper Capital Associates LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Oak Management Capital LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Yossi Ehrenfeld Investment LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ysro Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Zadun II Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ehrenfeld, Mindy | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ariella Ehrenfeld Investment LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| David Ostreicher Family Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ej Capital Holdings LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Gm Equities LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Gray Family Investors LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Levon Papa II LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Lpklr LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Michelle Ostreicher Family Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Patriot Hc 233 LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Shayna Steg Family Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| White Deer Investments, LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Yitzchok Steg Family Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ehrenfeld, Jacob | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Gelbtuch, Jay | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Lopiansky, Rebecca | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Millstein, Nechama | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, David | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Michelle | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Steg, Shayna | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Steg, Yitzchok | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Weisz, David | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Wolkenfeld, Stefan | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ilana Ostreicher Family Trust | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Juniper Capital Associates LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family Trust | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Oak Management Capital LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ysro Trust | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Marc | 5% or greater security interest | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| National Health Care Associates Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Gilmartin, Thomas | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/19/2024 | |
| Pitter, Rita | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ariella Ehrenfeld Investment LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Baker Tilly Advisory Group LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Dymer Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Ej Capital Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Gm Equities LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Gray Family Investors LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Ilana Ostreicher Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Juniper Capital Associates LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Levon Papa II LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Lpklr LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Maefair Acquistion Realty LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| National Health Care Associates Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Patriot Hc 233 LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Preferred Therapy Solutions LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Procare LTC Holding LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/19/2024 | |
| Yossi Ehrenfeld Investment LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/12/2024 | |
| Luthi, Christopher | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/12/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Ilana | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/03/2024 | |
| Pitter, Rita | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/19/2024 |
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.