Apple Rehab Middletown

600 Highland Ave, Middletown, CT 06457 (opens Google Maps) · Lower Ct River Vly County · (860) 347-3315· 70 certified beds · avg 66 residents/day · certified since Feb 26, 1969 · 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: APPLE REHAB (20 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Oct 7, 2024

Serious findings on record

most recent Aug 15, 2019

Fines, last 3 years

3.86

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 15, 2019 · F-0604

The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.

Why it matters: Unneeded restraints can cause injuries, muscle loss, and deep emotional distress.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 26, 2019 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 57 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

Jun 10, 2026D · 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
Jun 10, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint F-0689
Jun 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint F-0842

View all 57 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
Jun 10, 2026	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
Jun 10, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Jun 10, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
May 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
May 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
May 13, 2026	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
May 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
May 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · from a complaint · F-0711
Dec 11, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Nov 13, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Oct 7, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Oct 7, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Oct 7, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · F-0600
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Oct 7, 2024	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
Oct 7, 2024	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
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Oct 7, 2024	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
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · from a complaint · F-0661
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · from a complaint · F-0698
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. · from a complaint · F-0712
Oct 7, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640
Oct 7, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
May 22, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	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
Mar 26, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Nov 10, 2023	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Oct 5, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Oct 5, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Oct 5, 2023	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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 30, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Aug 30, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
May 10, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
May 10, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0677
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
May 10, 2022	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
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
May 10, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Aug 15, 2019	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Aug 15, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Aug 15, 2019	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
Aug 15, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686
Aug 15, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (14 → 16).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2019

2022

2023

2024

2026

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2019	5	1	G ▲
2022	14	0	E
2023	6	0	E
2024	24	0	E
2026	8	0	D

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

3.86

3.80

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.63

0.70

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

3.59

3.43

3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Measure	This facility	Connecticut avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.86	3.80	3.95	top 36% in Connecticut; top 46% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.63	0.70	0.69	top 47% in Connecticut; top 44% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.59	3.43	3.50	top 30% in Connecticut; top 38% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.39	0.46	0.48	bottom 49% in Connecticut; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	37.5	37.4	45.8	bottom 47% in Connecticut; top 30% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	40.0	38.6	42.9	bottom 47% in Connecticut; top 46% 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 3.27, RN 0.54, weekend 3.04.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.27 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 4/5 · 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 Apple Rehab Middletown. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Regional context: $525.78/day — Connecticut statewide average for a semi-private nursing-facility room, September 30, 2025. This is a historical regional figure, not this facility's price or a prediction. View the OPM source.

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 - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Foley, Brian	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	12/29/1986
Foley, Brian	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	12/29/1986
Singh, Devika	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	09/10/2018
Vess, Ryan	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	03/15/2013
Vess, Ryan	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	03/15/2013
Vess, Ryan	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/15/2013

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 Apple Rehab — 20 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.

Apple Rehab Mystic — Mystic, CT · overall 2/5
Apple Rehab Rocky Hill — Rocky Hill, CT · overall 2/5
Apple Rehab Saybrook — Old Saybrook, CT · overall 3/5
Apple Rehab Shelton Lakes — Shelton, CT · overall 2/5
Apple Rehab Uncasville — Uncasville, CT · overall 2/5
Apple Rehab Watertown — Watertown, CT · overall 4/5
Apple Rehab West Haven — West Haven, CT · overall 1/5
Gardner Heights Health Care Center, INC — Shelton, CT · overall 2/5

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 19 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

"What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
"Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
"If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
"Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"How often does each resident's doctor visit and review their care in person?"

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 38% 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 79 within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Water's Edge Center for Health & Rehabilitation	1.3 mi	Middletown, CT	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Wadsworth Glen Health Care and Rehabilitation Cent	1.6 mi	Middletown, CT	★☆☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Portland Care & Rehab Centre, INC	3.1 mi	Portland, CT	★★★★★	4/5
Pilgrim Manor	4.4 mi	Cromwell, CT	★★★★★	4/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Cromwell	4.4 mi	Cromwell, CT	★★★★☆	3/5
Apple Rehab Coccomo	5.1 mi	Meriden, CT	★☆☆☆☆	2/5
Connecticut Baptist Homes, INC	5.4 mi	Meriden, CT	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Cobalt Lodge Health Care and Rehabilitation Center	5.5 mi	Cobalt, CT	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuseSFF
Twin Maples Healthcare, INC	5.6 mi	Durham, CT	★★★☆☆	3/5
Apple Rehab Cromwell	5.7 mi	Cromwell, CT	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Complete Care at Meriden	6.7 mi	Meriden, CT	★★★★☆	3/5
Bradley Home Infirmary/Pavilion	7.3 mi	Meriden, CT	★★★★★	4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Lower Ct River Vly, CT — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Apple Rehab Saybrook — Old Saybrook, CT · overall 3/5
Chestelm Health and Rehabilitation Center — Moodus, CT · overall 5/5
Curtis Home St Elizabeth Center, the — Meriden, CT · overall 1/5
Essex Meadows Health Center — Essex, CT · overall 5/5
Gladeview Health Care Center — Old Saybrook, CT · overall 3/5

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Middletown →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075089.