How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Cambridge Health and Rehabilitation Center
2428 Easton Tnpk, Fairfield, CT 06825 (opens Google Maps) · Greater Bridgeport County · (203) 372-0313· 160 certified beds · avg 144 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1989 · 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★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 30, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.02
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: 3/5 · how star ratings work →
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 34 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 34 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 24, 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 |
| Nov 24, 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. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jan 14, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 14, 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 |
| Oct 9, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | 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 30, 2024 | 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 30, 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 30, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 30, 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 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Apr 30, 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 |
| Apr 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
| Apr 30, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · from a complaint · F-0694 |
| Oct 17, 2023 | 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 |
| Oct 17, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Oct 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Oct 17, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · from a complaint · F-0730 |
| Feb 16, 2022 | 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 16, 2022 | 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 16, 2022 | 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 16, 2022 | 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, 2019 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607 |
| Jul 25, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 4
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 4 | 0 | D |
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 facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.02
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.43
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.68
Connecticut average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.02 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 9% in Connecticut; bottom 14% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.43 | 0.70 | 0.69 | bottom 18% in Connecticut; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.68 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 5% in Connecticut; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.25 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 18% in Connecticut; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 35.2 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 46% in Connecticut; top 25% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 68.2 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 7% in Connecticut; bottom 13% 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 3.76, RN 0.54, weekend 3.33.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.76 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Cambridge Health and Rehabilitation 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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BPB Ventures LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 5% | 08/02/2021 |
| Cedar Hill NG Trust | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Juniper NG Trust | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Lopiansky, Rebecca | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Oak Drive NG Trust | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Ostreicher, David | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Rolling Hill NG Trust | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Steg, Shayna | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| The Harry and Helen Ostreicher Family Trust Fbo Agnes Zitter | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 18% | 01/01/2025 |
| The Harry and Helen Ostreicher Family Trust Fbo Marvin Ostreicher | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 18% | 01/01/2025 |
| Zitter, Agnes | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 18% | 05/14/2025 |
| Almeida, Elizabeth | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2008 |
| Barry Bokow 2012 Family Trust | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2012 |
| Bokow, Barry | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2016 |
| Bokow, Barry | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2016 |
| Bokow, Michael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2015 |
| BPB Equity Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2012 |
| BPB Ventures LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/03/2025 |
| Cambridge Manor Realty LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/15/2000 |
Showing 20 of 47 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 27 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
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.
- Evergreen Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Stafford Springs, CT · overall 3/5
- Glastonbury Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Glastonbury, CT · overall 3/5
- Hebrew Center for Health and Rehabilitation — West Hartford, CT · overall 3/5abuse
- Laurel Ridge Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Ridgefield, CT · overall 3/5abuse
- Ludlowe Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Fairfield, CT · overall 2/5abuse
- Maefair Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Trumbull, CT · overall 3/5
- Mansfield Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation — Storrs Mansfield, CT · overall 2/5
- Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center — Rocky Hill, CT · overall 5/5
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.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Connecticut 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 35% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 47 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 46 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Springs at 3030 Park, the | 1.2 mi | Bridgeport, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Mozaic Senior Life | 1.3 mi | Bridgeport, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Ludlowe Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 2.0 mi | Fairfield, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Civita Care Northbridge | 2.0 mi | Bridgeport, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Carolton Chronic & Convalescent Hospital INC | 3.6 mi | Fairfield, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Maefair Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 3.7 mi | Trumbull, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Southport Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC | 4.3 mi | Southport, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lord Chamberlain Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 8.1 mi | Stratford, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lord Chamberlain Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Ce | 8.1 mi | Stratford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Civita Care Center at Milford | 9.2 mi | Milford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Masonicare at Bishop Wicke Health & Rehabilitation | 9.6 mi | Shelton, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Norwalk | 9.7 mi | Norwalk, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Greater Bridgeport, CT — 15 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Gardner Heights Health Care Center, INC — Shelton, CT · overall 2/5
- Hewitt Health & Rehabilitation Center, INC — Shelton, CT · overall 2/5
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 075323.