How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Alameda Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare
303 Elm Street, Perth Amboy, NJ 08861 (opens Google Maps) · Middlesex County · (732) 442-9540· 250 certified beds · avg 223 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1982 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: PARAMOUNT CARE CENTERS (10 facilities, chain avg rating 3.3★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 3, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.93
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 27 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint F-0677
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. F-0584
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
View all 27 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 29, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Jul 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough backup water supply for essential areas of the building. · F-0922 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training. · F-0728 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Nov 3, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Nov 3, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Nov 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Nov 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Nov 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Nov 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (11 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 11 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityNew Jersey averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.93
New Jersey average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.19
New Jersey average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.50
New Jersey average: 3.53
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New Jersey avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.93 | 3.88 | 3.95 | top 33% in New Jersey; top 42% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.19 | 0.67 | 0.69 | bottom 1% in New Jersey; bottom 2% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.50 | 3.53 | 3.50 | top 38% in New Jersey; top 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.11 | 0.50 | 0.48 | bottom 2% in New Jersey; bottom 2% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 42.5 | 39.7 | 45.8 | bottom 40% in New Jersey; top 43% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 53.3 | 37.7 | 42.9 | bottom 20% in New Jersey; bottom 31% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.29, RN 0.16, weekend 2.93.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.29 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Alameda Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alameda Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/20/2016 |
| Blonder, David | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 30% | 04/20/2016 |
| Frankel, Eliyahu | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/20/2016 |
| Mendlowitz, Moshe | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 30% | 04/20/2016 |
| Frankel, Eliyahu | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/20/2016 |
| Kraus, Abraham | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/20/2016 |
All 6 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Paramount Care Centers — 10 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Brookhaven Health Care Center — East Orange, NJ · overall 3/5
- Echelon Care & Rehab — Voorhees, NJ · overall 4/5
- Hudsonview Health Care Center — North Bergen, NJ · overall 5/5
- Manhattanview Ctr for Rehabilitation and Healthcar — Union City, NJ · overall 4/5
- Sinai Post-Acute Nursing & Rehab Center — Newark, NJ · overall 1/5
- Ivory Wellness Center — Norristown, PA · overall 2/5
- Onyx Wellness Center — Norristown, PA · overall 1/5
- River's Edge Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Philadelphia, PA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 9 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 43% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 141 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spring Creek Healthcare Center | 1.7 mi | Perth Amboy, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Venetian Care & Rehabilitation Center, LLC | 2.1 mi | South Amboy, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| St Joseph's Home Al & NC, INC | 3.4 mi | Woodbridge, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| New Jersey Veterans Memorial Home Menlo | 4.2 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Roosevelt Care Center | 4.3 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Brighton Gardens of Edison | 5.9 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Complete Care at Madison, LLC | 6.6 mi | Matawan, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Adroit Care Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 6.8 mi | Rahway, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Hartwyck at Oak Tree | 6.9 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Care Connection Rahway | 7.1 mi | Rahway, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Embassy Manor at Edison Nursing and Rehabilitation | 7.3 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Anchor Care and Rehabilitation Center | 7.5 mi | Hazlet, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Middlesex, NJ — 25 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Aristacare at Cedar Oaks — South Plainfield, NJ · overall 2/5abuse
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Old Bridge — Old Bridge, NJ · overall 4/5
- Careone at East Brunswick — East Brunswick, NJ · overall 3/5
- Careone at the Highlands — Edison, NJ · overall 4/5
- Complete Care at Park Place LLC — Monmouth Junction, NJ · overall 4/5
- Cranbury Center — Monroe Township, NJ · overall 2/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315180.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).