How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Waugh Chapel
1221 Waugh Chapel Road, Gambrills, MD 21054 (opens Google Maps) · Anne Arundel County · (410) 923-2020· 110 certified beds · avg 106 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1983 · 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★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 6, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
2.89
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 31 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint 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. · from a complaint F-0641
The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. F-0919
View all 31 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 30, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 30, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| May 6, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919 |
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0732 |
| May 6, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Nov 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Mar 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 17, 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 |
| Mar 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 17, 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 |
| Mar 17, 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 |
| Mar 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0610 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 3, 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 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 3, 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 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 3, 2020 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 11
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 11 | 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 facilityMaryland averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 2.89
Maryland average: 3.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.50
Maryland average: 0.83
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.56
Maryland average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 2.89 | 3.83 | 3.95 | bottom 3% in Maryland; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.50 | 0.83 | 0.69 | bottom 19% in Maryland; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.56 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 2% in Maryland; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.37 | 0.63 | 0.48 | bottom 23% in Maryland; bottom 47% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 45.7 | 40.2 | 45.8 | bottom 36% in Maryland; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 31.6 | 38.7 | 42.9 | top 32% in Maryland; top 32% 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 3.64, RN 0.63, weekend 3.23.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.64 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 Autumn Lake Healthcare at Waugh Chapel. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1221 Waugh Chapel Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 05/01/2021 |
| Hatzlacha Rabbah LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
| MD12 Equities LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
| Stern, Aryeh | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
| Accurate Staffing LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
| Brand Sonnenschine LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
| Eidlisz, Solomon | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/27/2025 |
| Gluck, Rivka | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/27/2025 |
| Hefter, Tzvi | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/10/2023 |
| Hefter, Tzvi | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/10/2023 |
| Ryan, Jacqueline | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/10/2025 |
| Ryan, Jacqueline | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/10/2025 |
| Schwartz, Mark | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2021 |
All 13 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 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.
- Autumn Lake Healthcare Post-Acute Care Center — Baltimore, MD · overall 3/5
- King David Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Baltimore, MD · overall 2/5abuse
- Ashbrook Care & Rehabilitation Center — Scotch Plains, NJ · overall 2/5
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Berkeley Heights — Berkeley Heights, NJ · overall 4/5
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Memorial Bridge — Penns Grove, NJ · overall 2/5
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Oceanview — Ocean View, NJ · overall 3/5
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Old Bridge — Old Bridge, NJ · overall 4/5
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Salem County — Salem, NJ · overall 2/5
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.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "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?"
- "Can you show me the call buttons in the bathrooms and bathing areas, and tell me your average response time when one is pressed?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Where do you post your daily staffing numbers, and can I see today's?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Maryland midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 46% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 13 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 74 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Crofton | 2.1 mi | Crofton, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fairfield Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 4.1 mi | Crownsville, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Complete Care at Severna Park LLC | 6.5 mi | Severna Park, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Future Care Annapolis | 6.9 mi | Annapolis, MD | —/5 | ||
| Larkin Chase Center | 7.3 mi | Bowie, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Baltimore Washington | 7.4 mi | Glen Burnie, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ginger Cove | 8.5 mi | Annapolis, MD | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Marley Neck Rehabilitation and Wellness Center | 9.2 mi | Glen Burnie, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Future Care Chesapeake | 9.5 mi | Arnold, MD | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| South River Rehabilitation and Wellness Center | 9.6 mi | Edgewater, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Glen Burnie | 9.6 mi | Glen Burnie, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Cherry Lane | 9.7 mi | Laurel, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Anne Arundel, MD — 14 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Complete Care at Annapolis — Annapolis, MD · overall 5/5
- Hammonds Lane Center — Brooklyn Park, MD · overall 3/5
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 215148.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).