385 Main Street, Cromwell, CT 06416 (opens Google Maps) · Capitol County · (860) 635-5613· 175 certified beds · avg 170 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1979 · 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: AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE (59 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 2, 2026 · F-0697
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
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: May 25, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 31 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. F-0697
The facility did not protect residents from being involuntarily separated — kept apart from other residents, kept out of their own room, or confined to their room. Isolating a resident this way is a form of mistreatment. F-0603
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. F-0550
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents from being involuntarily separated — kept apart from other residents, kept out of their own room, or confined to their room. Isolating a resident this way is a form of mistreatment. · F-0603 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 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. · F-0550 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 2, 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. · F-0842 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · F-0849 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | 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 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jul 25, 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0757 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 8, 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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. · F-0711 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | B · Potential for 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (12 → 9).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 9 | 1 | G ▲ |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $10,628.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2026 | Fine | $10,628 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 2.94 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 5% in Connecticut; bottom 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.27 | 0.70 | 0.69 | bottom 2% in Connecticut; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.74 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 7% in Connecticut; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.16 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 2% in Connecticut; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 34.2 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 40% in Connecticut; top 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 12.5 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 8% in Connecticut; top 6% 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 3.01, RN 0.28, weekend 2.81.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.01 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Autumn Lake Healthcare at Cromwell. 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.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cromwell Parent LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/01/2015 |
| Accurate Staffing LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Brand Sonnenschine LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Cromwell Parent LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Cromwell Realty LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Cromwell Realty LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Raad, Marc | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2015 |
| Raad, Marc | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2015 |
| Scher, Chaim | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/19/2019 |
| Scher, Chaim | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/19/2019 |
| Schwartz, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2025 |
| Schwartz, Mark | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2015 |
| Stern, Aryeh | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
All 13 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Autumn Lake Healthcare — 59 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 58 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pilgrim Manor | 0.6 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Portland Care & Rehab Centre, INC | 1.6 mi | Portland, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Water's Edge Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 3.1 mi | Middletown, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Apple Rehab Cromwell | 3.4 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Wadsworth Glen Health Care and Rehabilitation Cent | 3.6 mi | Middletown, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| John L. Levitow Health Care Center | 3.6 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| 60 West | 3.7 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Middletown | 4.4 mi | Middletown, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Rocky Hill | 4.4 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center | 5.2 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Cobalt Lodge Health Care and Rehabilitation Center | 5.5 mi | Cobalt, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Civita Care Center at Newington | 6.6 mi | Newington, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Capitol, CT — 65 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 075263.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details