New Jersey ›Cherry Hill

Aristacare at Cherry Hill

1399 Chapel Ave West, Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 · Camden County · 140 certified beds · avg 133 residents/day · certified since May 12, 1987

Part of chain: ARISTACARE (9 facilities, chain avg rating 2.7★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$4,194
Fines, last 3 years
3.58
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

All citations in the current public record (54)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Jan 16, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Aug 27, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Aug 27, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Aug 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died.
Aug 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Aug 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Aug 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Feb 14, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 14, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 14, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility was not properly licensed, or did not operate in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and accepted professional standards. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective.
Mar 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Mar 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Mar 7, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 30, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint
Nov 30, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Nov 30, 2023B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Nov 24, 2021F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Nov 24, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Nov 24, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Nov 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Nov 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Nov 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Nov 24, 2021B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (25 → 12).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202180F
202330D
2024250E
2025160F
202620E

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)

1 fine totaling $4,194.

DateTypeAmount / length
Dec 11, 2023Fine$4,194

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

MeasureThis facilityNew Jersey avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.583.883.95bottom 45% in New Jersey; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.420.670.69bottom 25% in New Jersey; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.163.533.50bottom 38% in New Jersey; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.220.500.48bottom 14% in New Jersey; bottom 15% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)66.739.745.8bottom 3% in New Jersey; bottom 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)68.837.742.9bottom 5% in New Jersey; bottom 12% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.35, RN 0.39, weekend 2.96. Staffing rating: 2/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Greenberger, SidneyIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest50%01/01/2012
Klein, ZviIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest50%01/01/2012
Scherfel, JaysonIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2017

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Premier Cadbury of Cherry Hill0.9 miCherry Hill, NJ★★☆☆☆1/5
River Front Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center1.8 miPennsauken, NJ★☆☆☆☆2/5
Palace Rehabilitation and Care Center, the1.9 miMaple Shade, NJ★☆☆☆☆1/5
Dwellside Care and Rehab2.0 miCherry Hill, NJ★☆☆☆☆1/5
United Methodist Communities at Collingswood2.5 miCollingswood, NJ★★★★★5/5
Barclays Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center2.9 miCherry Hill, NJ★★★★☆3/5
Laurel Brook Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center3.2 miMount Laurel, NJ★★☆☆☆2/5
Silver Healthcare Center3.3 miCherry Hill, NJ★☆☆☆☆1/5
Abigail House for Nursing & Rehabilitation4.2 miCamden, NJ★★☆☆☆1/5
Majestic Center for Rehab & Sub-Acute Care4.2 miCamden, NJ★★★★★4/5
Wynwood Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center5.1 miCinnaminson, NJ★★☆☆☆1/5
St Mary's Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare5.2 miCherry Hill, NJ★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Cherry Hill →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315245.