Maryland ›Randallstown

Chapel Hill Nursing Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

4511 Robosson Road, Randallstown, MD 21133 (opens Google Maps) · Baltimore County · (410) 922-2443· 63 certified beds · avg 47 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1990 · 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: EPHRAM LAHASKY (22 facilities, chain avg rating 1.8★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 30, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 16, 2025
$13,247
Fines, last 3 years
4.18
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 19, 2020 · F-0658

The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.

Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.

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: Mar 31, 2020 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 16, 2025 · 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: Feb 28, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 64 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). F-0628

View all 64 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Mar 30, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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 30, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Mar 30, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628
Mar 30, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have firmly secured handrails on both sides of its hallways. · F-0924
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · F-0551
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility employed staff who were not licensed, certified, or registered as required by state law. · F-0839
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Jan 16, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Jan 16, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility hired someone with an official finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft against them. Facilities are not allowed to employ people with such findings. · from a complaint · F-0606
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0758
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · from a complaint · F-0947
Feb 19, 2020▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · F-0576
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · F-0711
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · F-0740
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943
Feb 19, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Feb 19, 2020C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 21).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 25
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 21
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2020251J ▲
2025181G ▲
2026210F

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $13,247.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jan 16, 2025Fine$13,247

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMaryland averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.18
Maryland average: 3.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.19
Maryland average: 0.83
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.64
Maryland average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMaryland avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.183.833.95top 22% in Maryland; top 33% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.190.830.69top 12% in Maryland; top 10% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.643.433.50top 25% in Maryland; top 36% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.770.630.48top 22% in Maryland; top 12% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)65.140.245.8bottom 2% in Maryland; bottom 10% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)66.738.742.9bottom 5% in Maryland; bottom 15% 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 3.72, RN 1.06, weekend 3.24.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.72 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Chapel Hill Nursing Center. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
BSD 26 Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—08/01/2019
Biderman, MichaelIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Giberstien, BaruchIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Jones, LavernIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Wasso, SusanIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019

All 5 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 Ephram Lahasky — 22 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 21 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "Are there secure handrails on both sides of every hallway, and how often are they checked?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "How do you involve a resident's representative in care decisions, and how quickly are they consulted?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 65% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 83 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Patapsco Healthcare3.5 miRandallstown, MD★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Future Care Cherrywood4.4 miReisterstown, MD★★★★★4/5
Future Care Old Court4.9 miRandallstown, MD★★★★★5/5
North Oaks Communities5.0 miBaltimore, MD★★★★☆5/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Birch Manor6.1 miSykesville, MD★★★★☆3/5
Willowbrooke Court Skilled Care Center Fairhaven6.2 miSykesville, MD★★★★☆3/5
Copper Ridge Nursing and Assisted Living Center6.3 miSykesville, MD★☆☆☆☆1/5
Courtland, LLC6.4 miBaltimore, MD★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Encore at Turf Valley6.9 miEllicott City, MD★★★★☆4/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Pikesville7.5 miPikesville, MD★★☆☆☆1/5
Ellicott City Healthcare Center7.6 miEllicott City, MD★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Resorts of Augsburg8.0 miBaltimore, MD★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Baltimore, MD — 43 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.

All facilities in Randallstown →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 215220.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details