How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Civita Care Center at Long Ridge
710 Long Ridge Road, Stamford, CT 06902 (opens Google Maps) · Western Ct County · (203) 329-4026· 120 certified beds · avg 116 residents/day · certified since Nov 17, 1993 · 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: CIVITA CARE CENTERS (6 facilities, chain avg rating 2.0★)
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.
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 22, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.67
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 28 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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 22, 2025 | 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 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | 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 |
| May 9, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | 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. · F-0584 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 26, 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 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Sep 26, 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 26, 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. · F-0600 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 26, 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 26, 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 26, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 26, 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 26, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Sep 26, 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 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · F-0810 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Aug 10, 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 |
| Aug 10, 2021 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 17 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 1 | 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: 3.67
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.72
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.27
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) | 3.67 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 49% in Connecticut; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.72 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 31% in Connecticut; top 34% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.27 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 43% in Connecticut; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.41 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 47% in Connecticut; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 24.7 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 14% in Connecticut; top 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 38.9 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 49% in Connecticut; top 45% 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 0.74, weekend 3.35.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: 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Civita Care Center at Long Ridge. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ct6 Opco Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/01/2024 |
| Esnh LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 10/01/2024 |
| JPNH LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 10/01/2024 |
| Pepper, Yehuda | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 10/01/2024 |
| Schwarcz, Elliot | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 10/01/2024 |
| 710 Long Ridge LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| 710 Long Ridge LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/10/2025 |
| Antipuesto, Cris | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Antipuesto, Cris | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/10/2025 |
| Ct6 Opco Holdco LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Ct6 Propco Holdco LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/10/2025 |
| Esnh LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/15/2025 |
| Everflow Healthcare LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/10/2025 |
| Friedman, Samuel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Fusco, Michael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/10/2025 |
| JPNH LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/15/2025 |
| Pepper, Yehuda | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Pepper, Yehuda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Pepper, Yehuda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Schwarcz, Elliot | Individual | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
Showing 20 of 23 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 3 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 Civita Care Centers — 6 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.
- Civita Care Center at Milford — Milford, CT · overall 1/5abuse
- Civita Care Center at Newington — Newington, CT · overall 1/5abuse
- Civita Care Center at West River — Milford, CT · overall 4/5
- Civita Care Center at Cheshire — Cheshire, CT · overall 2/5abuse
- Civita Care Center at Danbury — Danbury, CT · overall 2/5abuse
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
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 did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "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 25% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 23 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 64 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edgehill Health Center | 2.3 mi | Stamford, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Villa at Stamford, the | 3.2 mi | Stamford, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Stamford Care Center | 3.4 mi | Stamford, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ark Healthcare & Rehabilitation at St. Camillus | 3.5 mi | Stamford, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Nathaniel Witherell, the | 4.0 mi | Greenwich, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Waveny Care Center | 4.3 mi | New Canaan, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Greenwich Woods Rehabilitation | 7.2 mi | Greenwich, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| King Street Home INC | 7.3 mi | Port Chester, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Norwalk Care Center | 7.4 mi | Norwalk, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Notre Dame Health and Rehabilitation Center | 8.2 mi | Norwalk, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Norwalk | 8.4 mi | Norwalk, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Enclave at Rye Rehab and Nursing Ctr | 9.1 mi | Port Chester, NY | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
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.
- Havencare at Filosa — Danbury, CT · overall 5/5
- Havencare at Hancock Hall — Danbury, CT · overall 5/5
- Laurel Ridge Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Ridgefield, CT · overall 3/5abuse
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 075394.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).