New JerseyNorwood

Buckingham at Norwood, the

100 McClellan Street, Norwood, NJ 07648 · Bergen County · 240 certified beds · avg 180 residents/day · certified since Feb 16, 1990

Part of chain: EXCELCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$76,226
Fines, last 3 years
3.11
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide · Nov 7, 2024 · F-0728

The facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training.

Why it matters: Aides provide most hands-on daily care, and untrained aides raise the risk of injuries and neglect.

Severity (L): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation existed throughout the facility. The single most serious citation CMS can issue.

Corrected: Dec 6, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Jul 14, 2023 · F-0880

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.

Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.

Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Aug 10, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (25)

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
Apr 2, 2026E · 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. · from a complaint
Apr 2, 2026D · 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.
Apr 2, 2026D · 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.
Apr 2, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Apr 2, 2026D · 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.
Apr 2, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility was not properly licensed, or did not operate in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and accepted professional standards.
Nov 7, 2024▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, facility-wideThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training.
Nov 7, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Nov 7, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Nov 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.
Nov 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.
Nov 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.
Nov 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 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.
Nov 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.
Nov 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.
Nov 7, 2024D · 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.
Nov 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care.
Nov 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 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.
Nov 7, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 14, 2023▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe 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.
Jul 14, 2023D · 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.
Jul 14, 2023D · 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.
Jul 14, 2023D · 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202341J ▲
2024151L ▲
202660E

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 $76,226.

DateTypeAmount / length
Nov 7, 2024Fine$76,226

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)3.113.883.95bottom 9% in New Jersey; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.510.670.69bottom 41% in New Jersey; bottom 39% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.893.533.50bottom 16% in New Jersey; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.400.500.48top 49% in New Jersey; top 48% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)39.139.745.8bottom 49% in New Jersey; top 34% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)42.437.742.9bottom 38% in New Jersey; bottom 49% 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 3.21, RN 0.52, weekend 2.99. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Jacobs, HymanIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest95%01/18/2002
Jacobs, LiviaIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest5%01/18/2002
Dublin, TrevorIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE12/03/2018
Metternich, ChristopherIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/17/2017

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
Jewish Home at Rockleigh1.7 miRockleigh, NJ★★★★☆3/5
Careone at Valley3.2 miWestwood, NJ★★★★★5/5
Emerson Health Care Center4.1 miEmerson, NJ★★★★★5/5
Family of Caring at Park Ridge LLC4.2 miPark Ridge, NJ★☆☆☆☆1/5
St Cabrini Nursing Home4.3 miDobbs Ferry, NY★★★☆☆3/5
Careone at Oradell4.6 miOradell, NJ★☆☆☆☆1/5
Andrus on Hudson4.6 miHastings on Hudson, NY★★★★☆3/5
Careone at Cresskill4.6 miCresskill, NJ★★★★☆3/5
Adira at Riverside Rehabilitation and Nursing4.7 miYonkers, NY★★☆☆☆1/5
Elizabeth Seton Children's Center5.2 miYonkers, NY★★★★★4/5
Family of Caring Healthcare at Tenafly, LLC5.5 miTenafly, NJ★★★☆☆3/5
Sans Souci Rehabilitation and Nursing Center5.8 miYonkers, NY★★☆☆☆1/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Norwood →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315290.