1100 Norman Eskridge Highway, Seaford, DE 19973 · Sussex County · (302) 629-3575
124 certified beds, about 90 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1976
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 085015 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 9, 2025, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Delaware average is 10.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 55 health citations since September 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $33,933 in the last three years; the largest was $33,933, and the latest is dated September 24, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.59 hours per resident per day, against 4.35 across Delaware and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.71 of those hours.
37.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Delaware average 41.3%).
CMS links it to Genesis Healthcare, an affiliated group of 184 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 55 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that for two (R26 and R50) out of three residents reviewed for personal property the facility failed to provide reasonable protection of resident belongings from loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that for one (R50) out of one resident reviewed for grievances, that the facility failed to ensure prompt efforts were made to resolve the resident's concerns.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for three (R4, R28 and R74) out of three residents reviewed for a level II PASRR, the facility failed to ensure that a referral for a level II PASRR screening was required following a new diagnosis for a mental health disorder.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R113) out of thirty residents reviewed in the investigative sample, the facility failed to develop a care plan to address an identified concern.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that for one (R79) out of ninety-one residents screened during the initial pool process the facility failed to ensure that medications were administered in accordance with professional standards.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R12) out of two residents reviewed for positioning, the facility failed to turn and reposition the resident and promote the healing of a pressure ulcer 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 (R12) out of one resident reviewed for tube feeding, the facility failed to utilize a feeding tube in accordance with current professional standards of practice.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that for one (R13) out of one residents reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to ensure R13's oxygen mask and nebulizer equipment were stored in a protective plastic bag.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined that for one (R10) out of two residents reviewed for dental services the facility failed to provide assistance with dental services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that for one (R47) out of three residents reviewed for wound care the facility failed to ensure adherence to practices that prevent the spread infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that for one (R1) out of three residents reviewed for abuse the facility failed to report an allegation of sexual abuse within the required time constraints. Based on the facility's evidence to correct the noncompliance at the time of the current survey, the deficiency was determined to be past non-compliance as of 6/6/25.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R2) out of two residents reviewed for respiratory therapy, the facility failed to have R2's BiPAP settings orders in R2's EMR at admission.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, it was determined that for three (R1, R5, R6) out of three residents reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to establish a process to obtain complete lab reports from the dialysis provider.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, it was determined that for three (R1, R5, R6) out of six residents reviewed for Physician Services, the facility failed to have the physician review the resident's total program of care. For R1, the physician failed to review R1's lab work (resident had labs obtained at hemodialysis) and regarding R1's supplemental oxygen usage. For R5 and R6, the physician failed to review lab work obtained at hemodialysis. R6 had a known hospitalization for hyperkalemia in November 2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for two (R5, R6) out of three residents reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to have the clinical record laboratory report containing the name and address of the testing lab in the residents' EMR.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for three (R1, R5, R6) out of three residents reviewed for dialysis, the facility failed to maintain medical records that were complete and readily accessible with regards to lab results.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined that for two (R20 and R45) out of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility failed to provide care and services to prevent pressure ulcers and promote healing. For R45 the facility failed to prevent an avoidable deep tissue injury from developing to the bilateral heels causing harm. For R20 the facility failed to ensure that the resident was turned and repositioned to prevent pressure ulcers resulting in an avoidable Stage 3 pressure ulcer to the right heel and an avoidable stage 4 pressure ulcer to the left heel, resulting in harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (R7, R22, R43 and R66) out of twenty (20) sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure that the required interdisciplinary team (IDT) members participated in the care plan meetings and that meetings occurred every three months. In addition, R66's care plan had not been reviewed and revised to reflect a behavior of frequently removing his nebulizer equipment from the protective plastic bag.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that for three (R20, R38 and R45) out of three residents reviewed for bowel and bladder, the facility failed to respond to or provide services to maintain or restore bladder continence.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for five (E7, E8, E9, E10 and E11) out of five certified nursing assistants reviewed, the facility failed to complete an annual evaluation.
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 observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R18) out of six residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs), the facility failed to get R18 out of bed in accordance with his preference.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation and interview it was determined that for two (R10 and R48) out of three Medicare Part A discharges reviewed the facility failed to have evidence of a completed Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it has been determined that for one (R64) out of three sampled for PASARR, the facility failed to ensure a referral for a PASARR screening was done for a new mental health diagnosis.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that for two (R39 and R89) out of six residents reviewed for ADLs, the facility failed to ensure ADLs were provided to dependent residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, it has been determined that for one (R66) out of two residents sampled for respiratory care the facility failed to provide professional standards of practice by ensuring R66's nebulizer equipment was stored in a protective plastic bag.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for two (R22 and R57) out of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, it was determined that psychoactive medications lacked monitoring. For R22, the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring with an AIMS assessment. Additonally, the facility failed to monitor R57, a resident taking antipsychotic medication, for symptoms of psychosis.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R11) out of three residents reviewed for change in condition, the facility failed to immediately consult the Physician when R11 experienced a change in condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, it was determined that for one (R14) out of three residents reviewed for ADLs, the facility failed to ensure ADLs were provided to dependent residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review it was determined that for one (R11) out of three residents reviewed for quality of care, the facility failed to ensure treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. R11 had a change in respiratory status that was unrecognized and hospital transfer was delayed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R21) out of fourteen residents reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure that R21 was free of sexual abuse by R6, a resident with a history of sexually inappropriate behavior. The facility's failure to monitor R6 allowed the sexual abuse of R21 on 5/22/22. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified and due to the facility's corrective measures following the incident, this is being cited as an immediate jeopardy, past non-compliance with and abatement date of 5/24/22, which was verified by interviews and review of facility records.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (R5, R15, R91 and R102) out of four residents reviewed for Insulin, the facility failed to ensure that the physician reviewed the residents' total program of care as presented in the interfacility transfer documentation. For R91, the physician's failure to ensure that the resident's total program of care was accurately evaluated upon his admission and throughout his stay in the facility placed R91 in Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) of a serious, adverse outcome. The Physician's failure to order an insulin sliding scale, finger stick blood sugar checks, Trojeo (concentrated insulin) medication daily, and the correct frequency of Synjardy (combination anti-diabetic medication containing empagliflozin and metfomin) resulted in R91's metabolic derangement and resultant diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to establish a Grievance Policy that informed the residents of their right to obtain written decision regarding their grievance. The posted grievance policy did not have the correct name of the current Grievance Official and contact information. Also, the grievance policy was not prominently displayed at wheelchair level in large print to accommodate wheelchair bound and /or poor visual acuity residents. The grievance box for completed grievance forms outside the main office is not marked as the grievance box nor is it at wheelchair level. Additionally for R70, the facility failed to inform R70 of the outcome of his grievance investigation or offer R70 a resolution to his grievance.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure safe sanitary storage of food, provide the sanitizing solution required for disinfecting food preparation surfaces, and maintain sanitary food preparation areas.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure attendance of required members at the quarterly quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) meetings.
Inspectors wroteBased on random observation and interview, it was determined that for one (Unit 2) of two units reviewed, the facility failed to promote care for residents in a manner and environment that maintained or enhanced each resident's dignity and respect in full recognition of his or her own individuality.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that for two out of two resident units, the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for four (E13, E14, E15, and E16) out of five certified nursing assistants reviewed, the facility failed to complete an annual evaluation.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were stored and labeled properly in two out of six medication carts and in one out of two medication rooms reviewed. In addition, the facility failed to monitor refrigerator temperatures in one medication fridge on Unit 1.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for four (R7, R16, R20 and R60) out of six 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, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview, it was determined that for one (R264) out of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs), the facility failed to get R77 out of bed in accordance with her preference.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R393) of fourteen (14) residents reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure that an allegation of abuse was reported to the State Agency within the two hour time frame.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that for two (R91 and R192) out of two new admissions reviewed the facility failed to ensure a written summary of their baseline care plan was provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that for two (R13 and R82) out of twenty-six (26) of the investigative sampled residents the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person centered care plan for identified needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, it was determined that for one (R15) out of twenty-six (26) residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans, the facility failed to provide R15 the opportunity to participate in his care plan meetings.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that for one (R60) out of five residents reviewed for ADL care provided for dependent residents, the facility failed to provide the necessary assistance to get OOB (out of bed).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for two (R11 and R23) out of three residents reviewed for quality of care, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received treatment and care in accordance with the plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for two (R82 and R243) out of two residents reviewed for respiratory care, the facility failed to provide professional standards of practice by ensuring the oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle was labeled and changed weekly.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review it was determined that the facility failed to develop and maintain policies and procedures for the Medication Regimen Review (MRR) that included time frames for the various steps in the process.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R5) out of six residents reviewed for medication review, the facility failed to ensure that R5's erythromycin eye ointment was not continued for an excessive duration after confirming no active infection in June 2023.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that for one of six residents reviewed for medication review, the facility failed to ensure that R91 was free from significant medication error.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined, for four (R91, R102, R103 and R104) out of four residents sampled for laboratory services, the facility failed to promptly notify the ordering medical practitioner of laboratory results that fell outside of clinical reference ranges. In addition, the facility failed to have a policy and procedures, for notification of the practitioner, when laboratory results fall outside of the clinical reference range.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received the selected food from the menu for one (R78) out of ten sampled residents for food investigation.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of other facility documentation it was determined that the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with professional standards and practices, that medical records for one (R82) out of twenty six (26) of the investigative sampled residents were accurate.
6 fire safety citations on file: 1 on September 24, 2024, 1 on September 7, 2023, 4 on July 9, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 24, 2024 | Fine | $33,933 |
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) | 3.59 | 4.35 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.71 | 0.97 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.43 | 3.89 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.21 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.67 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 37.2% | 41.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 45.0% | 41.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.47 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 3.65 on weekdays and 3.43 on weekends, 6% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.72 in April to June 2025 to 3.59 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 | 3.59 | 0.71 | 3.65 | 3.43 | 5.1% | 0 of 90 | 90 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.73 | 0.83 | 3.86 | 3.40 | 5.0% | 0 of 92 | 89 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.76 | 0.92 | 3.92 | 3.36 | 1.4% | 0 of 92 | 89 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.72 | 0.94 | 3.88 | 3.33 | 0.4% | 0 of 91 | 87 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 16.9 | 12.7 | 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 | 0.3 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 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 | 22.9 | 13.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.1 | 3.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.1 | 10.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.5 | 23.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.3 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Seaford Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (44.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
44.6% 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. 116 eligible stays.
12.2% 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. 133 eligible stays.
9.8% 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. 90 eligible stays.
50.9% 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. 59 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 86 residents counted.
4.3% 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. 86 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: 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. 6 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: 1100 NORMAN ESKRIDGE HIGHWAY OPERATIONS LLC. CMS links this home to Genesis Healthcare, a group of 184 nursing homes averaging 2.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genesis De Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2011 |
| Fc-Gen Operations Investment LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Gen Operations I LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Gen Operations II LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Healthcare Inc | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Healthcare LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Operations LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2011 | |
| Ghc Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2011 | |
| Sun Healthcare Group Inc | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Whitman, Arnold | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 02/02/2015 | |
| Berg, Michael | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/02/2015 | |
| Bridgeford, Laura | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2024 | |
| Mendelson, Avi | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2024 | |
| Erhart, Carol | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/12/2024 | |
| Genesis Operations LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/28/2025 | |
| Erhart, Carol | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/28/2025 |
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.