13 Park Lawn Drive, Bethel, CT 06801 (opens Google Maps) · Western Ct County · (203) 830-4180· 161 certified beds · avg 152 residents/day · certified since Mar 16, 1994 · 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: NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES (42 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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 · May 10, 2024 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.
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: Apr 5, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 10, 2024 · 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 (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: Jul 27, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)
Showing the latest 3 of 31 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. F-0550
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 22, 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 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Jul 22, 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 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Oct 29, 2024 | E · Potential for more than 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 |
| May 10, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| May 10, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0688 |
| Sep 6, 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. · F-0689 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Sep 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · F-0909 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · F-0790 |
| Jul 21, 2021 | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 6).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 3 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 6 | 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 →
2 fines totaling $16,036.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2024 | Fine | $8,018 |
| May 10, 2024 | Fine | $8,018 |
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) | 3.69 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 50% in Connecticut; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.67 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 39% in Connecticut; top 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.22 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 40% in Connecticut; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.46 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 37% in Connecticut; top 38% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 35.9 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 50% in Connecticut; top 26% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 34.6 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 42% in Connecticut; top 38% 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 4.22, RN 0.76, weekend 3.69.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.22 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Bethel Health Care Center. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bethel Investors, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 51% | 01/01/2017 |
| BPB Equity Holdings LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2018 |
| Butler, Helen | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Butler, Mary | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Butler, Matthew | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Butler, Robert | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Cedar Hill NG Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Estate of Roland Charles Butler | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 37% | 04/07/2025 |
| Flight, Grace | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 7% | 06/06/2007 |
| Geffner, Ira | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Juniper NG Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| McCollam, Mary | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Miller, Meaghan | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Oak Drive NG Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Rolling Hill NG Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Almeida, Elizabeth | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Barry Bokow 2012 Family Trust | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/07/2020 |
| Bethel Health Care Realty, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2017 |
| Bethel Investors, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Bokow, Barry | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/02/2026 |
Showing 20 of 46 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 26 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain National Health Care Associates — 42 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 41 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Glen Hill | 2.6 mi | Danbury, CT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Civita Care Center at Danbury | 2.7 mi | Danbury, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Saint John Paul II Center | 4.0 mi | Danbury, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Havencare at Hancock Hall | 4.3 mi | Danbury, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Havencare at Filosa | 4.3 mi | Danbury, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Stone Bridge Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 7.5 mi | Newtown, CT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Laurel Ridge Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 8.0 mi | Ridgefield, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| River Glen Health Care Center | 8.8 mi | Southbury, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Putnam Ridge | 9.0 mi | Brewster, NY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Pomperaug Woods Health Center | 10.1 mi | Southbury, CT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Village Crest Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 11.0 mi | New Milford, CT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lutheran Home of Southbury INC | 11.2 mi | Southbury, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Western Ct, CT — 20 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 075400.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details