3415 Greencastle Road, Burtonsville, MD 20866 (opens Google Maps) · Montgomery County · (240) 970-5600· 145 certified beds · avg 127 residents/day · certified since Dec 24, 1998 · 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jul 1, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Jun 30, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
Showing the latest 3 of 40 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 29, 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| May 29, 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 29, 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0569 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | E · Potential for more than 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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. · F-0609 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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 7, 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. · F-0658 |
| Apr 7, 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. · F-0689 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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 1, 2025 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · from a complaint · F-0710 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0806 |
| Feb 19, 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | 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 20, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | 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 20, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | 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 20, 2020 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2020 | C · Potential for 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 14).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 12 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2026 | 17 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $11,381.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 2025 | Fine | $11,381 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Maryland avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.32 | 3.83 | 3.95 | bottom 33% in Maryland; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.58 | 0.83 | 0.69 | bottom 31% in Maryland; bottom 50% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.04 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 38% in Maryland; bottom 33% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.55 | 0.63 | 0.48 | top 45% in Maryland; top 28% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 38.7 | 40.2 | 45.8 | top 45% in Maryland; top 33% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 47.1 | 38.7 | 42.9 | bottom 30% in Maryland; bottom 40% 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 3.63, RN 0.64, weekend 3.33.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.63 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5 · 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 Oak Manor. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3415 Greencastle Road Holdco LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| As Family MD4 Holdings LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| M Meisels Family Holdings LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| 3415 Greencastle Road Holdco LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| 3415 Greencastle Road Propco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| 3415 Greencastle Road Propco LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Accurate Staffing LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| As Family MD4 Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Brand Sonnenschine LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Kyler, Benjamin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/26/2024 |
| Kyler, Benjamin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/26/2024 |
| M Meisels Family Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
| Sabapathi, Ramesh | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2023 |
| Sabapathi, Ramesh | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2023 |
| Schwartz, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Schwartz, Mark | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
All 16 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fairland Center | 2.0 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Silver Spring | 2.2 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Riderwood Village | 3.0 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Harmony Suites Rehabilitation and Wellness Center | 3.4 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Patuxent River | 3.4 mi | Laurel, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Springbrook | 4.0 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sterling Care Hillhaven | 4.5 mi | Adelphi, MD | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Cherry Lane | 4.9 mi | Laurel, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Friends Nursing Home | 5.5 mi | Sandy Spring, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Arcola | 6.2 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Layhill Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 6.5 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Brooke Grove Rehab. & Nsg Ctr | 6.6 mi | Sandy Spring, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Montgomery, MD — 34 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 215315.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details