4 Cedar Crest Village Drive, Pompton Plains, NJ 07444 (opens Google Maps) · Morris County · (973) 831-3504· 113 certified beds · avg 109 residents/day · certified since Apr 15, 2005 · 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 →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: ERICKSON SENIOR LIVING (17 facilities, chain avg rating 4.2★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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 · Sep 23, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
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: Oct 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 7, 2026 · 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: Jan 23, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 25, 2024 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.
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 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 14 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 29, 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 |
| Jan 29, 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 |
| Jan 7, 2026 | ▲ 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 23, 2025 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 12, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0578 |
| Mar 12, 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | F · Potential for more than 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 |
| Sep 13, 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. · F-0658 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726 |
| May 25, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| May 25, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638 |
| May 25, 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 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 2).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 5 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 3 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
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 →
3 fines totaling $49,960.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2026 | Fine | $9,110 |
| Sep 23, 2025 | Fine | $32,338 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | Fine | $8,512 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New Jersey avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.55 | 3.88 | 3.95 | top 16% in New Jersey; top 22% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.92 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 16% in New Jersey; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.08 | 3.53 | 3.50 | top 17% in New Jersey; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.42 | 0.50 | 0.48 | top 46% in New Jersey; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 21.2 | 39.7 | 45.8 | top 8% in New Jersey; top 4% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 19.0 | 37.7 | 42.9 | top 14% in New Jersey; top 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 4.18, RN 0.84, weekend 3.74.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.18 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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 Cedar Crest/Mountainview Gardens. 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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Senior Communities, INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/14/2021 |
| Bison, Michael | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/08/2025 |
| Brown, Ian | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2023 |
| Brown, Patricia | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Butler, Richard | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2014 |
| Clupper, Katherine | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Colins, Mary | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2010 |
| Colins, Mary | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2019 |
| Embley, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/27/2021 |
| Embley, Mark | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/27/2021 |
| Embley, Mark | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/27/2021 |
| Erickson Senior Living LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/23/2020 |
| Erickson Senior Living LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Erstad, Eileen | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Erstad, Eileen | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Goodman, James | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/26/2026 |
| Hall, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/30/2010 |
| Hall, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/30/2010 |
| Hall, John | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/30/2010 |
| Jacque, Zina | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
Showing 20 of 48 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 28 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Erickson Senior Living — 17 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 16 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Health Center at Bloomingdale | 2.2 mi | Bloomingdale, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Phoenix Center for Rehabilitation and Pediatrics | 2.8 mi | Haskell, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Wayne Hills Rehab & Resp Center | 2.9 mi | Wayne, NJ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Llanfair House Care & Rehabilitation Center | 3.0 mi | Wayne, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Arbor Ridge Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 3.0 mi | Wayne, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lakeland Nursing & Rehab | 3.6 mi | Haskell, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Careone at Wayne | 3.7 mi | Wayne, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Avalon Rehab and Care Center | 3.8 mi | Wayne, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Oakland Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 4.5 mi | Oakland, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lincoln Park Renaissance | 4.9 mi | Lincoln Park, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lincoln Park Care Center | 4.9 mi | Lincoln Park, NJ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Atrium Post Acute Care of Wayne | 5.3 mi | Wayne, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Morris, NJ — 21 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 315491.
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