21 W Clarke Avenue, Milford, DE 19963 · Sussex County · (302) 503-7650
100 certified beds, about 94 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2020
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 085058 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 11, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Delaware average is 10.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 67 health citations since April 2024, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $144,544 in the last three years; the largest was $114,368, and the latest is dated February 11, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.96 hours per resident per day, against 4.35 across Delaware and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.76 of those hours.
67.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Delaware average 41.3%).
CMS links it to Nationwide Healthcare Services, an affiliated group of 7 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 67 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteAn unannounced Follow-up Survey was conducted on March 26, 2026, for the Annual and Complaint Survey ending February 11, 2026, by the State of Delaware Division of Health Care Quality, Office of Long-Term Care Residents Protection. The facility census on the first day of the survey was ninety-two (92). The sample size was twenty (20) residents. The facility was found to be in substantial compliance with 42 CFR Part 483, Subpart B, Requirements for Long Term Care as of March 17, 2026. An informal dispute resolution (IDR) was conducted for this citation. It was determined that the citation was past non-compliance and corrected by the facility 8/24/25. No additional correction on part of the facility was necessary as a result of the survey. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide evidence that residents or their representatives were informed of the risks, potential side effects, and available treatment options for two of five residents (Resident (R) 12, and R66) reviewed for unnecessary medications who received antipsychotic and/or psychotropic medications This deficient practice resulted in residents receiving medications that may not have been clinically necessary.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide the required Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (ABN) notifications to three of three residents (Residents (R) 109, R81 and R110) reviewed for beneficiary notification. This failure had the potential to affect all residents who continued residing in the facility after the end of their Medicare Part A services by limiting their ability to make informed decisions regarding their financial responsibility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, facility document review, and policy review, the facility failed to follow its abuse policy and did not conduct a thorough investigation into allegations of abuse involving two of five residents (Resident (R) 59 and R72) reviewed for abuse out of 32 sampled residents. This failure had the potential to result in unrecognized or ongoing abuse that puts other residents in the facility at risk.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a person-centered comprehensive care plan was developed for three residents (Resident (R) 6, R52, and R108) out of a total of 32 sampled residents. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for unmet care needs, ongoing assessment, and provider notification.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow professional standards or its own established tracheostomy care procedures for cleaning the stoma site, replacing the inner cannula, and ensuring two staff members were present during care for one of six residents (Resident (R) 93) reviewed for respiratory care out of a total of 32 sampled residents. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for respiratory distress or infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in the implementation of respiratory isolation for one of one resident (Resident (R) 52) reviewed for transmission-based precautions out of a total sample of 32 residents. This failure had the potential to lead to the transmission of droplet pathogens from resident to staff not wearing a mask or eye protection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, record review and other facility documentation, the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet the needs of residents for 7 of 20 residents reviewed for staffing. The facility did not ensure adequate availability of staff to respond to resident care needs in a timely manner. Findings Include:As of December 2024, the facility assessment documented the following: 5 residents were independent with ADL's; 35 to 40 residents required assistance from 1-2 staff members; 50 to 55 residents were dependent on staff for ADL support. Despite this, residents experienced prolonged call bell response times and unmet care needs. At the time, the census on the Riverwalk unit was 58.1. Interview with a resident who wished to remain anonymous:8/6/25 2:51 PM - F1 reported multiple instances of delays when resident A1 called for assistance with toileting. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R6) out of three sampled residents for dental services, the facility failed to ensure the resident received dental services.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for two (R299 and R46) out of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from a significant medication error when staff failed to administer insulin. Additionally, staff failed to conduct finger stick blood sugar monitoring, which included sliding scale insulin coverage based on the results. The facility's failure placed the residents at risk for a serious adverse outcome including diabetic ketoacidosis, diabetic coma or even death from untreated elevated blood sugar. Due to this failure an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was called on 1/23/25 at 11:52 AM. The IJ was abated on 1/23/25 at 11:00 PM.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R85) out of three residents reviewed for pain, the facility failed to provide pain management according to professional standards of practice. R85 was not provided pain medication, causing unrelieved pain for approximately sixty four hours resulting in harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for eight (R3, R4, R27, R46, R57, R63, R89 and R91) out of thirty-seven residents investigated the facility failed to develop person centered care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that for one (R85) out of thirty-seven residents reviewed in the investigative sample, the facility failed to ensure care preferences were being honored.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for two (R43 and R79) out of three residents reviewed for personal funds the facility failed to ensure residents had access to the their funds.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R81) out of five residents reviewed for Advance Directives, the facility failed to offer an opportunity to formulate an advance directive.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R64) out of two residents reviewed for change in condition, the facility failed to consult the provider and notify the responsible party when R64 experienced a significant change in condition and plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that for one (R64) out of one reviewed for grievances, the facility failed to ensure that resident concerns received by the facility included prompt efforts to resolve the resident's problems.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R18) out of two (2) residents reviewed for misappropriation of resident property, the facility failed to recognize and consequently report an allegation of misappropriation of resident property/funds no later than 24 hours.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R18) out of two (2) residents reviewed for allegations of misappropriation of resident property, the facility failed to provide evidence that the allegation was thoroughly investigated.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of other facility documents it was determined that for one (R148) out of three residents reviewed for discharge the facility failed to ensure that discharge requirements were met when the facility initiated discharge regarding R148 occurred on 10/9/24 without notice to the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for three (R35, R46 and R61) out of three sampled residents for hospitalization, the facility failed to provide written bed hold notice to the resident and/or the resident's representative when transferred to the hospital.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R148) out of three residents reviewed discharge the facility failed to ensure R148 was readmitted to the facility or that the facility complied with discharge requirements. R148 was sent to the hospital on [DATE] and was not permitted to return to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it has been determined that the facility failed to review and revise for one (R85) out of thirty-seven sampled residents' care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for two (R6 and R27) out of thirty seven residents sampled, the facility failed to provide services that meet professional standards of quality by having Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN) complete admission assessments and admission progress notes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that for one (R6) out of nine residents reviewed for ADLs, the facility failed to ensure ADLs were provided to dependent residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R64) out of two residents reviewed for change in condition, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R37) out of two residents reviewed for ROM the facility failed to ensure that R37 received appropriate treatment and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion when the annual contractures measurement comparison evaluation was not completed on time.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R47) out of two residents reviewed for accidents the facility failed to provide supervision for R47 to prevent an accident. The resident was left unsupervised during care and fell off the bed resulting in a head injury and needed to be sent to the hospital for evaluation and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that for four (R4, R27, R61, R64 and R3) out of seven residents reviewed for bowel and bladder, the facility failed to respond to or provide services to maintain or restore bowel and bladder continence.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for two (R11 and R91) out of two residents reviewed for tube feeding the facility failed to implement current professional standards of practice, to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined that for four (R10, R29, R67 and R80) out of seven residents sampled for respiratory care the facility failed to provide respiratory care based on professional standards for R10, R29, R67 and R80's nebulizer mask was not dated and not in a plastic bag when not in use. R10's nebulizer mask was dated 12/26/24. Further review of R10, R29, R67 and R80's records lacked evidence of orders to change and store nebulizer masks.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review and other documentation as indicated, it was determined that for one (R300) out of five reviewed residents for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to ensure that R300's medical care was supervised by a physician for the care of pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (E39) out of five CNA's reviewed for annual performance reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the annual performance review was completed at least once every twelve months.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R32) out of one resident reviewed for medication administration, the facility failed to provide pharmacy services to refill medications to avoid missed doses.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R27) out of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to limit an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication to 14 days.
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that for three out of five medication storage refrigerators, the facility failed to facilitate the safe administration of medication to residents and staff. In addition, the facility failed to ensure that testing materials for COVID-19 would accurately reflect residents and employees COVID status.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined, for one (R64) out of four residents sampled for laboratory services, the facility failed to promptly notify the ordering medical practitioner of laboratory results.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R27) out of seven sampled residents for dental services, the facility failed to assist the residents in obtaining routine dental services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that for one (R64) out of one residents reviewed for nutrition the facility failed to provide fluid in a form designed to meet the individuals needs.
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 food borne illness to the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R500) out of thirty-four (34) residents reviewed, the facility failed to ensure the residents medical record was complete, accurately documented and readily accessible.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for two (E28 and E49) out of six employees reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that mandatory communication training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews it was determined that for two (E29 and E30) of out of six employees reviewed, the facility failed to ensure resident rights training was ongoing.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for two (E28 and E47) out of six employees reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that staff completed QAPI training.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for two (E29 and E30) out of six employees reviewed for required training the facility failed to ensure that infection control training was completed and consistent with policy standards.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for three (E28, E29, and E30) out of six employees reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that annual training of the compliance and ethics program was completed for an organization operating five or more facilities.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for four (E30, E32, E39, and E40) out of five CNA'S reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that the required minimum twelve hours of in-service training was completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for two (E28 and E29) out of six staff reviewed, the facility failed to ensure that required behavioral health training was completed in accordance with the Facility Assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R2) out five residents reviewed for discharge the facility failed to implement an effective discharge plan that addressed R2's needs related to a community primary care physician, open wounds, insulin dependence, and visual impairment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R2) out of five residents reviewed for discharge the facility failed to ensure continuity of medically related social services upon the residents discharge. R2 discharged from the facility on 5/17/24 and was not connected with the community caseworker for an estimated four days.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for one (R57) out of five residents reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided adequate supervision to prevent accidents resulting in harm. Based on review of the facility's evidence to correct the non-compliance and the facility's substantial compliance at the time of the current survey, the deficiency was determined to be past non-compliance as of 10/24/22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that all nourishment refrigerators were maintained in a sanitary condition and food is stored safely to prevent food-borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, it was determined that for three (R7, R23 and R57) out of three sampled residents reviewed for dignity, the facility failed to promote care in a manner and environment that maintained or enhanced their dignity and respect.
Inspectors wroteReview of the facility policy titled, Change in a Resident's Condition or Status last dated 2/2021 documented . 1. Our facility promptly notifies the resident, his or her attending physician, and the resident representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status, changes in level of care, billing/payments, resident rights, etc. Review of R8's clinical record revealed: 7/1/21 - R8 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis including but not limited to hypertension, stroke, left side weakness and depression. 1/5/24 - Review of the facilities diet requisition form revealed R8 was on a regular textured diet and thin liquids. 2/15/24 12:47 PM - A physician's order written by E4 (MD) for R8 documented . 1. Regular diet dysphagia mechanical soft texture thin liquids consistency. Patient may have regular pleasure foods. [...]
Inspectors wrote2. Review of R57's clinical record revealed: 10/11/22 - R57 was readmitted to the facility with diagnoses including but not limited to quadriplegia, spinal muscular atrophy, morbid obesity and tracheostomy. 1/18/24 - MDS quarterly documented R57 as totally dependent. 4/7/24 1:00 PM - An observation and interview with R57 revealed the sip and puff (type of call bell) was next to the bed in a position that R57 was unable to use. 4/7/24 1:44 PM - An observation of E37 (CNA) leaving the room with R57's lunch tray and the sip and puff was next to the bed in a position that R57 was unable to use. 4/7/24 1:53 PM - During an observation and interview with E36 (Respiratory Therapist) it was confirmed that the resident did not have her sip and puff, but she would be able to call out for help.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R287) out of three residents reviewed for discharge the facility failed to provide R286 the Notice to Medicare Provider Non-Coverage (NOMIC) form before services were terminated.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R53) out of three residents reviewed for abuse the facility failed to recognize and immediately report an allegation of abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R42) out of five residents reviewed for medication review the facility failed to ensure accuracy of the MDS assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review it has been determined that for one (R68) out of one resident reviewed for PASARR, the facility failed to ensure a referral for a new PASARR Level I and II screening occurred by or before the 60th day. R68 was remained in the facility beyond the authorization timeframe.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R42) out of five residents reviewed for medication review the facility failed to develop a care plan to address the residents use of an anticoagulant.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (R33, R45, R55, and R75) out of of twenty-three (23) sampled residents, the facility failed to have input from all required interdisciplinary team (IDT) members at the residents' care plan meetings.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, it was determined that for two (R24 and R57) out of four residents reviewed for position and mobility, the facility failed to turn and reposition the resident in accordance with professional standards of practice to prevent skin breakdown.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined that for one (R75) out of one resident reviewed for incontinence, the facility failed to respond to or provide services to restore bladder continence.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of R3's clinical record revealed: 8/25/22 - R3 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including but not limited to acute respiratory failure, difficulty swallowing and hypertension. 11/28/23 5:20 PM - A physician's order documented . 1. Tracheostomy care change oxygen tubing, canister and humidifier bottle one time a day every Monday and as needed. 4/7/24 10:08 AM - R3 was observed sitting in the wheelchair in her room, further observations revealed that R8's tracheal suction machine equipment had not been changed, the suction canister had thick secretions and had a date of 1/26/24 and tubing for the suction equipment was not dated. 4/8/24 12:34 PM - Day 2 observations revealed R3's tracheal suction machine equipment had not been changed and the canister contained the same thick secretions as observed and dated 1/26/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R42) out of five residents reviewed for medication review the facility failed to ensure pharmacist recommendations were reviewed by the attending physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for one (R42) out of five residents reviewed for medication review the facility failed to complete AIMS testing every six months for a resident on antipsychotic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that for one (room [ROOM NUMBER]) out of 59 rooms observed the facility failed to ensure cleanliness.
2 fire safety citations on file: 2 on January 28, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 11, 2026 | Fine | $17,345 |
| January 28, 2025 | Fine | $114,368 |
| April 11, 2024 | Fine | $12,831 |
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) | 3.96 | 4.35 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.76 | 0.97 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.67 | 3.89 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.94 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.26 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 67.8% | 41.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 79.4% | 41.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.20 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 4.08 on weekdays and 3.67 on weekends, 10% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 21.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.14 in April to June 2025 to 3.96 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 | 3.96 | 0.76 | 4.08 | 3.67 | 21.4% | 0 of 90 | 94 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.32 | 0.97 | 4.49 | 3.89 | 30.4% | 0 of 92 | 90 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.19 | 0.83 | 4.33 | 3.83 | 33.3% | 0 of 92 | 91 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.14 | 0.89 | 4.23 | 3.92 | 38.6% | 0 of 91 | 91 |
| 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 | 13.7 | 12.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.2 | 13.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 3.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.8 | 10.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 32.7 | 23.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.2 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Polaris Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (56.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.8% this home
No different from 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. 157 eligible stays.
9.1% 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. 155 eligible stays.
8.3% 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. 95 eligible stays.
47.5% 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. 61 residents counted.
1.0% 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. 100 residents counted.
2.1% 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. 100 residents counted.
100.0% 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. 30 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: POLARIS HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER LLC. CMS links this home to Nationwide Healthcare Services, a group of 7 nursing homes averaging 2.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gelley, Leah | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 5% | 05/20/2019 |
| Gelley, Meir | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 95% | 05/20/2019 |
| Gelley, Meir | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 05/20/2019 | |
| Nationwide Healthcare Services | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/20/2019 |
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.