30 Cragmere Road, Suffern, NY 10901 · Rockland County · (845) 357-1230
203 certified beds, about 186 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 335148 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 13, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the New York average is 8.1, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since April 2019, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.63 across New York and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.40 of those hours.
27.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (New York average 40.3%).
CMS links it to Carerite Centers, an affiliated group of 34 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, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 03/08/2026 to 03/13/2026, the facility did not ensure action as a fiduciary (trustee) of the resident's funds and hold, safeguard, manage, and account for the residents' personal funds deposited with the facility for one (1) (Resident #29) of two (2) residents reviewed for personal funds. Specifically, the facility restricted Resident #29 to receiving money on two (2) days a week and in an amount lower than the resident wanted.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure the residents' right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for two (2) of eight (8) residents (Resident #126 and Resident #170) reviewed for the environment. Specifically, 1) Resident #126 was observed sitting in a wheelchair that was visibly soiled on the frame, cushion, and protective gauze; 2) Resident #170 was observed sitting in a wheelchair that was visibly soiled on the frame, body, and back of wheelchair.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary assistance with eating for one (1) of six (6) residents (Resident #128) reviewed for nutrition and one (1) of 19 residents (Resident #140) reviewed for dining. Specifically, 1) Resident #128, who had significant weight loss and required maximal assistance with eating was observed receiving only set up assistance during meals; 2) Resident #140, who had a history of weight loss and required moderate assistance with eating was observed receiving mostly only set up assistance during meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the residents' environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #72) reviewed for Accidents. Specifically, Resident #72 had a history of falls and multiple safety interventions in place including keeping the environment well lit and clutter free. Floor mats were determined to be a tripping hazard and not included as an intervention for their safety; however, floor mats were observed in the room and staff reported that they were in use.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility did not ensure care consistent with professional standards of practice, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan was provided for one (1) of two (2) residents (Resident #69) reviewed for Respiratory Care. Specifically, Resident #69 was administered oxygen at a liter flow greater than the current physician's order.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review conducted during the recertification survey from [DATE] to [DATE], the facility did not ensure a resident received behavioral health services to attain their highest practicable well-being, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care. This was evident for one (1) (Resident #9) of one (1) resident reviewed for Behavioral/Emotional Status. Specifically, Resident #9 had a physician order for a psychiatry and psychology consultation after making an inappropriate sexual comment to another resident on [DATE]. Resident #9 was not evaluated by a psychiatrist or psychologist in accordance with the physician order.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews during a recertification survey from 3/08/2026 to 3/13/2026, the facility did not ensure that food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, six (6) food items were not properly identified in the kitchen refrigerators, freezers, and food storage areas and one dietary cook was not wearing a beard net while actively preparing food.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interviews conducted during the abbreviated Survey #2637567, the facility failed to ensure residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for neglect. Specifically, Certified Nurse Aide #1 did not provide Resident #1 with staff assistance for meeting their activities of daily living needs during the evening shift on 10/06/2025, despite documenting such care was given. Subsequently, Resident #1 was last seen on 10/06/2025 at 9:12 PM in their room sitting fully clothed in their wheelchair and at 11:51 PM, Resident #1 was found in their room lying face down on the floor between the bed and wheelchair, with their head under the bed and their oxygen nasal cannula dislodged. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview during abbreviated survey #2637567, the facility did not ensure accurate documentation of medical records in accordance with accepted professional standard and practice were maintained for one (1) (Resident #1) of three (3) residents reviewed for activity of daily living care. Specifically, Certified Nurse Aide #1 documented in the electronic medical record activity of daily living cares on [DATE] that had not been provided. Additionally, although Resident #1 expired on [DATE] at 12:20 AM and their remains were removed from the facility at approximately 3:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse #10 documented hourly rounding was completed for Resident #1 on [DATE] from 11:45 PM-6:45 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review completed during a complaint investigation (NY00374056) the facility did not maintain infection prevention and control practices in accordance with guidelines for enhanced barrier precautions for one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for infection control practices. Specifically, Resident #2 was on enhanced barrier precautions, as indicated by signage posted on the wall outside of their room. On three separate occasions, staff provided hands-on care without wearing gowns. Record review:The facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 1/28/25 documented that enhanced barrier precautions are utilized to reduce the transmission of multi-drug-resistant organisms to residents. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interviews conducted during abbreviated survey (NY00331188) the facility did not ensure that the Comprehensive Care Plans were reviewed and revised in a timely manner for 1(Resident #2) of 4 residents reviewed for Abuse. Specifically, Resident #2's Behavior Care Plan initiated 4/22/22 documented that they were two assists with cares due to history of accusatory behaviors and the care plan was not reviewed and revised to populate these interventions onto Certified Nurse Aides tasks/documentation. Certified Nurse Aide #2 was unaware of Resident #2's plan of requiring two person assists and they provided care to Resident #2 without another staff member present. Resident #2 accused Certified Nurse Aide #2 of alleged abuse after cares were provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews conducted during the recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, 1. Cold foods were stored in a soiled, unsanitary refrigerated unit, 2. Cold foods to be served at activities events were stored in an unsanitary manner in a refrigerated unit, 3. Unlabeled, defrosted, uncooked, ground beef was stored in a refrigerated unit, 4. cooling logs were being utilized to ensure that foods were cooled in a safe and timely manner, 5. 2 of 7 nourishment refrigerators were not maintained at safe temperatures for food safety, and 5. Two food service staff did not follow safe food handling practices while recording food temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview during the recertification and abbreviated surveys (NY 309477) conducted from 11/8/2023 through 11/17/2023, the facility did not ensure a thorough and complete investigation was conducted for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #70) reviewed for abuse/neglect. Specifically, for Resident #70 the facility did not conduct a complete and thorough investigation, including a root cause analysis to determine why physician recommended magnesium citrate scheduled for 1/10/2023 and 1/11/2023 was not administered for management of the residents' constipation. Subsequently on 1/12/2023 Resident #70 required manual dis-impaction.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 11/8/23 to 11/17/23, the facility did not provide an ongoing program of activities for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #39) reviewed for activities. Specifically, Resident #39 was not provided opportunities to consistently participate in independent activities of their choice and to be regularly reassessed for their preferences.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification and abbreviated surveys (#NY00326212 and NY00309477) from 11/8/23 to 11/17/23, the facility did not ensure 1 of 3 residents (Resident #70) reviewed for abuse/neglect and 1 of 3 (Resident #63) reviewed for medications, received care and treatment in accordance with professional standards. Specifically, 1) Resident #70's medications for constipation was not given timely, the physician and pharmacy were not notified when the medication was unavailable; and 2) Resident #63 was not provided their medication with meals as ordered.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that residents were provided the appropriate treatment to improve and/or prevent a further decline in range of motion (ROM) for 1 of 2 residents, (Resident #120) reviewed for positioning and limited mobility. Specifically, Resident # 120 was not provided soft booties as per physical therapy recommendations. Resident #120 was admitted with diagnoses and medical conditions including but not limited to encephalopathy, cerebral vascular accident (Stroke), and generalized muscle weakness. The 11/05/2020 risk for chronic pain related to contractures and impaired mobility care plan, revised 11/10/23, did not include use of soft booties or monitoring the effect(s) of their use. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews conducted during the recertification survey conducted from 11/8/2023 to 11/17/2023, it was determined that for one of four (Resident #82) reviewed for respiratory care, the facility did not ensure that the resident received proper respiratory treatment and care consistent with professional standards of practice, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan. Specifically, Resident #82 did not receive continuous oxygen 3L/min via nasal cannula as per physician order.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interview during the 11/8/2023 -11/17/2023 recertification survey, it could not be ensured that for 3 of 3 residents (Resident # 35, #126 and #129) reviewed for dignity that the residents' rights and/or that care was provided in a dignified manner. Specifically, Residents #35, #126 and #129 were not provided a dignified dining experience.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not determine there had been a significant change in the residents mental or physical condition within 14 days for 1 resident (#104) reviewed for decline in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Specifically, a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS: a resident assessment tool) was not completed to ensure all appropriate interventions were in place after a decline from extensive assist to total dependence was identified in two areas of ADLs. Specifically, the resident declined from extensive assistance to total dependence for toilet use and personal hygiene.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that comprehensive person-centered care plans with measurable goals and interventions were developed to address the residents' respiratory and diabetic needs. Specifically, 1) 1 resident (Resident #28) reviewed for respiratory care did not have care plans in place to address her respiratory needs; and 2) 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 28) reviewed for unnecessary medications did not have care plans in place to address her diabetic needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that staff followed protocol for the care of a BI-PAP machine (a device to treat sleep apnea) for 1 resident (Resident # 28) who required respiratory support.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review conducted during the recertification survey, it was determined that for one of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility did not ensure that the resident's drug regimen was reviewed at least once a month by a licensed pharmacist. Specifically, no drug regimen review was completed for Resident #104 for the month of February 2019. (Resident #104).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that each residents' medication regimen was free from unnecessary medications. Specifically, the Psychiatrist's recommendation to discontinue Cymbalta (antidepressant) was not communicated to the resident's primary medical doctor concurrent with a new order for a different antidepressant, resulting in the administration of duplicate medication therapies to the resident for a period of 12 days (4/4/19 to 4/15/19). This was evident for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #104). Duplicate therapy refers to multiple medications of the same pharmacological class/category or any medication therapy that substantially duplicates a particular effect of another medication that the individual is taking. The finding is: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review conducted during a recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that its medication error rate 5% or less. This was evident for 1 of 5 residents observed during a medication pass (Resident # 4). This resulted in an error rate of 12% out of total of 25 opportunities observed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review conducted during a recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the facility staff followed proper hand hygiene, gloving, and proper cleansing of a blood glucose monitoring device to prevent the spread of infection. This was evident for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for pressure ulcer wound care (Resident #119) and 3 of 5 residents observed during medication administration (Resident #s 4, 98 and 105).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview conducted during the recertification survey it was determined that residents were not aware of the location of the results of the most recent survey. Specifically, the signage indicating the location of the most recent survey and the actual survey results were placed together in an area not readily available to the public.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #119 and #183), reviewed for hospitalization, that the resident and/or their representatives received written notification of the facility bed hold policy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews conducted during the recent recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that garbage and refuse were contained and disposed of in an appropriate manner. Specifically, the area surrounding the trash compactor was not maintained in a sanitary condition.
Inspectors wroteBased upon observations, interview and record review conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that advance directives formulated for one resident (#104) were effectively implemented according to facility policy to identify the residents' written consent for Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). Specifically, an identifier (orange dot) indicating DNR was not found on the resident's identification (ID) band and on the paper chart spine. The facility is required to establish, maintain, and implement written policies and procedures regarding the residents' right to formulate an advance directive, refuse medical or surgical treatment. In addition, the facility management is responsible for ensuring that staff follow those policies and procedures. The finding is: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that 1 of 6 residents (#62) was consistently invited to care plan meetings. Specifically, Resident # 62 stated during an interview that she attended one care plan meeting soon after admission but has not been invited to any further care plan meetings. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) Policy dated 02/19/2019 revealed that to ensure resident and family participation in the interdisciplinary treatment plan, residents (as they are able to) and families are invited to attend during an initial, annual or significant change CCP meetings.
25 fire safety citations on file: 8 on March 13, 2026, 10 on November 17, 2023, 7 on April 18, 2019.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | New York | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.24 | 3.63 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.40 | 0.71 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.93 | 3.18 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.94 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.91 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 27.7% | 40.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 43.5% | 39.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.12 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 3.37 on weekdays and 2.93 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.29 in April to June 2025 to 3.24 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 | 3.24 | 0.40 | 3.37 | 2.93 | 1.8% | 0 of 90 | 186 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.20 | 0.39 | 3.31 | 2.93 | 1.9% | 0 of 92 | 190 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.22 | 0.39 | 3.33 | 2.94 | 2.3% | 0 of 92 | 189 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.29 | 0.39 | 3.43 | 2.94 | 2.3% | 0 of 91 | 186 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| New York, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.55 | 0.68 | 3.72 | 3.13 | 9.8% | 0.1% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| New York, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $23.36 | $21.04 to $24.99 | 87,990 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $32.30 | $29.52 to $37.00 | 39,400 |
| Registered nurses | $52.62 | $45.60 to $62.34 | 205,810 |
| 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 | New York | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.7 | 14.1 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.4 | 12.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.1 | 6.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.8 | 13.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.0 | 20.6 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.8 | 9.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Willows at Ramapo Rehab and Nursing Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (56.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · New York: 101 better, 157 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. 454 eligible stays.
10.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · New York: 12 better, 5 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. 367 eligible stays.
9.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · New York: 7 better, 21 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. 286 eligible stays.
62.5% this home
Median of homes: New York60.6% · 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. 280 residents counted.
0.3% this home
Median of homes: New York0.6% · 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. 375 residents counted.
2.4% this home
Median of homes: New York2.0% · 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. 375 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: New York98.5% · 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. 188 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: RAMAPO MANOR NURSING CENTER INC. CMS links this home to Carerite Centers, a group of 34 nursing homes averaging 3.6 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahuja, Sanjay | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 15% | 08/01/2006 |
| Einhorn, Neal | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 9% | 07/01/2012 |
| Einhorn, Sharon | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 9% | 07/01/2012 |
| Friedman, Devorah | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 9% | 07/01/2012 |
| Friedman, Mark | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 9% | 07/01/2012 |
| Mohan, Namita | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 15% | 08/01/2006 |
| Mudgil, Vanita | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 15% | 08/01/2006 |
| Zimiles, Joseph | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 15% | 08/01/2006 |
| Zucker, Yossie | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Einhorn, Neal | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Friedman, Mark | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Friedman, Mark | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Zimiles, Joseph | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Ahuja, Sanjay | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Einhorn, Neal | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Green-Rivers, Kelly | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2016 | |
| Halon, Jonathan | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/02/2016 | |
| Shah, Parag | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/05/2015 | |
| Ahuja, Sanjay | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2006 | |
| Einhorn, Neal | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Einhorn, Sharon | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Friedman, Devorah | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Friedman, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2012 | |
| Green-Rivers, Kelly | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2016 | |
| Halon, Jonathan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/02/2016 | |
| Mohan, Namita | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2006 | |
| Mudgil, Vanita | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2006 | |
| Shah, Parag | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/05/2015 | |
| Zimiles, Joseph | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2006 |
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.
Licensed assisted living homes in the same town or within 5 miles, each with its New York inspection record.
These are the official offices in New York. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.