Home / Connecticut / Plantsville
261 Summit Street, Plantsville, CT 06479 · Capitol County · (860) 628-0364
150 certified beds, about 146 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1999
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 075420 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 8, 2025, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Connecticut average is 13.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 40 health citations since September 2021, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $3,652 in the last three years; the largest was $3,652, and the latest is dated December 8, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.58 hours per resident per day, against 3.73 across Connecticut and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.45 of those hours.
38.7% 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 40 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, interviews, facility documentation and facility policies for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to revise and implement resident-specific care plan and care card interventions following repeated resident-to-resident physical altercations to ensure cognitively impaired residents residing on a secured unit were supervised and maintained at a safe distance from one another. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility documentation, review of facility policies and procedures, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that environmental rounds were conducted/completed monthly, the facility failed to ensure the monthly Infection Control Surveillance data collection reports were inclusive of all infections identified within the facility and the facility failed to identify a possible communicable disease/outbreak amongst residents and for 3 sampled residents (Residents #150, #46, #116) reviewed for dining, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed in the dining room.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from the medication carts and not in use, failed to ensure multiple use vials were labelled upon opening to ensure they were discarded after 30 days.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, review of facility policy, review of facility documentation, and interviews for five of ten sampled residents (Resident #3, Resident #20, Resident #151, Resident #153, and Resident #154) reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to ensure that the pneumococcal vaccine was assessed, offered/ and administered as requested by the resident upon/on admission.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for the one sampled resident (Resident #20) reviewed for Advanced Directives, the facility failed to ensure the physician's orders accurately reflected the resident's code status of do not resuscitate.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Residents #101) reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), the facility failed to ensure the MDS accurately reflected the residents' status.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for one of five sampled residents (Resident #110) reviewed for unnecessary medication, the facility failed to ensure the care plan included interventions to address the possible side effects and the monitoring that should accompany the use of anticoagulant medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for one sampled resident (Residents #110) reviewed for pressure ulcer/injury, the facility failed to ensure the alternating pressure relief mattress was in place as ordered and set to the ordered weight.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of four sampled residents (Resident #95) reviewed for nutrition, the facility failed to ensure that the dietician completed a quarterly assessment for a resident with weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical records, review of facility policy, facility documentation, and interview for one of six residents (Resident #3) reviewed for immunizations, the facility to ensure that the COVID-19 booster vaccine was offered on admission to the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who were a potential for falls, the facility failed to implement a care plan intervention directing staff to encourage the resident to sleep in his/her own bedroom after the resident was observed by multiple staff sleeping in a chair in the dining room just prior to the resident sustaining a fall with fractures.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who had sustained a fall with injury, the facilityfailed to medicate the resident for severe pain while waiting one (1) hour to be transferred to the hospital.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, review of facility documentation, facility policies, and interviews for one (1) of five (5) sampled residents (Resident #1) who were dependent on staff for transfers, the facility failed to ensure two (2) staff members were assisting the resident with a transfer in accordance with the care plan to prevent the resident from sustaining a laceration to the left shin.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record reviews, facility documentation and interviews for one (1) of five (5) resident units, the facility failed to ensure a medication cup containing pre-poured medications was secured in the medication cart when the medication cart was left unattended and not within the line of sight of the nurse.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents, the facility failed to ensure a safe Hoyer lift (mechanical lift) transfer for a resident, due to environmental constraints that impeded stabilization of the Hoyer lift's legs, resulting in the resident being struck in the head by the Hoyer lift arm.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #4) who were reviewed for an allegation of abuse, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Director of Nursing or Administrator and State Agency within two (2) hours after the incident occurred.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #2) who required staff supervision during meals due to dysphagia (difficulty with swallowing) and non-compliant with following the plan of care, the facility failed to ensure the resident's safety when the nurse aide left the resident unsupervised in the room and failed to inform the nurse that the resident refused meal supervision.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for mistreatment, the facility failed to ensure resident was treated with respect.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observation, facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 2 sampled residents ( Resident # 5) reviewed for skin condition non-pressure, the facility failed to consistently conduct weekly wound assessment per facility policy and for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #45) reviewed for dining, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order for supervision and staff assistance during meals and for 3 of 10 residents ( Residents # 69, # 106 and # 120) reviewed for smoking, the facility failed to conduct smoking evaluation and safety per policy and for 1 of 7 sampled residents ( Resident # 57), the facility failed to administer the resident's medications as directed by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, facility documentation, review, facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #30) review for self-administration of medications, the facility failed to provide an environment free of potential accident hazards when a syringe and prescribed medications were left unattended in the resident's room and for 2 of 7 residents ( Resident # 57 and Resident # 134) reviewed for smoking, the facility failed assess the resident's smoking compliance timely and failed to provide supervision during smoking per policy to ensure a hazard free environment .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation of the nourishment refrigerator and snack area on the memory care unit and interviews, the facility failed to date and label and remove expired food items.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, review of facility documentation, review of policy and interviews for 2 residents ( Residents # 7 and# 10), the facility failed to store urinals, bath basins and bed pans in a sanitary way and in accordance to the facility policy and for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #83 and Resident #111), the facility failed to ensure the residents were protected against infection by ensuring Transmission Based Precautions were implemented. and for 1 of 2 sampled residents ( Resident # 126) reviewed for pressure ulcer, the facility failed to ensure staff perform hand-hygiene to prevent of the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility documentation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen ice machine was cleaned and sanitized regularly, the kitchen floor was free of a thick buildup of grease surrounding the grease trap, surrounding pipes were cleaned and failed to properly repaired hole in the dishwashing sink to ensure equipment was maintained in safe operating condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility documentation review of policy and interviews for 1 of 8 residents (Resident # 49) reviewed for Advanced Directive, the facility failed to provide evidence of the resident's complete and signed DNR wishes / code status form and failed to ensure a physician signed the resident's code status.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, review of facility policy, facility documentation and interviews for 1 of 4 residents ( Resident # 134) reviewed for Abuse, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from physical abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure staff reported and investigated an allegation of abuse and timely.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record and interviews for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident # 32), the facility failed to complete a significant change in condition for a resident with a decline in status.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation and interview for 1 of 6 residents (Resident # 114) the facility failed to submit a level 2 preadmission screening and resident review (PASRR) with a newly identified psychiatric diagnosis.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 10 sampled residents (Residents # 69 and 134) reviewed for Accidents, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive person-centered care plan for smoking.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, review of policy and staff interviews for 1 of 7 residents (Resident # 57), who required assistance with medication administration, the facility failed to meet professional standards of practice when administering a pain medication and 1 of 1 sampled resident who utilized Narcan, the failed to ensure that the Registered Nurse stayed with resident after the first dose of Narcan administration per facility practice.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, facility policy and interviews for 2 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #s 102 and 119) reviewed for Respiratory Care, the facility failed to ensure the resident oxygen was administered as directed by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of facility documentation review of policy and interviews for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for specialized treatment (Resident #58), the facility failed to ensure the resident intake and output were consistently monitored and the residents pre and post weight were monitored on the resident's communication log.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for medication administration of Narcan (Resident #57), the facility failed to ensure the licensed was educated and trained prior to administering the medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record, review of facility policy, facility documentation and interviews for 1 of 4 residents ( Resident # 134) reviewed for Abuse, the facility failed to ensure psychiatric services were provided to a resident specifically related to trauma after an abusive incident .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview for 1 of 4 medication carts, the facility failed to ensure resident safety by ensuring a medication cart was locked on the secure memory care unit.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policy and interviews for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #45) who required assistance with ADL, the facility failed to ensure the resident's call light was accessible to resident while in bed.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews ,review of policy,review of facility documentation and interviews for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for discharge (Resident #149), the facility failed to ensure the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately coded to reflect the residents discharge status at the time of the assessment and 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #100) who was reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASSR), the facility failed to correctly code the resident's clinical diagnosis and for 2 of 10 sampled residents (Residents # 69 and #106) who were reviewed for smoking, the facility failed to correctly code the assessment to reflect the residents smoking status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, facility's documentation review and interviews for kitchen maintenance, the facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and dated in accordance with facility policy, and the facility failed to ensure foods were discarded timely when spoiled.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, facility documentation review and interviews for one of two residents (Resident #144) reviewed for advanced directives, the facility failed to complete advanced directive in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, facility policy review and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #51) observed unsupervised with medications at the bedside, the facility failed to ensure licensed staff remained with the resident during medication administration and the facility failed to ensure medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff/residents.
5 fire safety citations on file: 1 on January 9, 2024, 4 on September 20, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 8, 2025 | Fine | $3,652 |
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) | 3.58 | 3.73 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.45 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.29 | 3.37 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.20 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.93 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 38.7% | 37.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 47.1% | 38.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.75 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 3.70 on weekdays and 3.29 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 9.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.73 in April to June 2025 to 3.58 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 | 3.58 | 0.45 | 3.70 | 3.29 | 9.1% | 0 of 90 | 146 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.65 | 0.46 | 3.78 | 3.33 | 6.3% | 0 of 92 | 144 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.82 | 0.45 | 3.96 | 3.47 | 9.8% | 0 of 92 | 142 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.73 | 0.41 | 3.82 | 3.50 | 11.0% | 0 of 91 | 142 |
| 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 | 9.4 | 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 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.4 | 16.4 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 4.0 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.0 | 17.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.8 | 24.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.7 | 10.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Summit at Plantsville Center for Health & Rehabili's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (55.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
55.4% 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. 97 eligible stays.
12.1% 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. 115 eligible stays.
7.2% 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. 69 eligible stays.
60.0% 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. 55 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. 91 residents counted.
0.9% 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. 91 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. 1 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: SUMMIT AT PLANTSVILLE 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 | |
| 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 | |
| David Ostreicher Family Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Shayna Steg Family Trust | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Lopiansky, Rebecca | 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 | |
| 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 | |
| Master Tenant Holdco Ct5 II LLC | 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 | 10/10/2024 | |
| Gilmartin, Thomas | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Melanson, Douglas | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Ilana | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Baker Tilly Advisory Group LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Dymer Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Ilana Ostreicher Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Juniper Capital Associates LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Master Tenant Holdco Ct5 II LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| National Health Care Associates Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Preferred Therapy Solutions LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Procare LTC Holding LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/10/2024 | |
| Desilva, Garumuni | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/10/2024 | |
| Melanson, Douglas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/13/2025 | |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/10/2024 |
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.