How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Clove Lakes Health Care and Rehabilitation Center,
25 Fanning Street, Staten Island, NY 10314 (opens Google Maps) · Richmond County · (718) 289-7900· 576 certified beds · avg 544 residents/day · certified since Jun 25, 1969 · 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: INFINITE CARE (8 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.
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Oct 16, 2024
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 27, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
2.71
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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Apr 27, 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Apr 27, 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 (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jun 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · 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: Jun 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint
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 (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: Jun 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.
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: Jun 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 35 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 27, 2026 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | ▲ 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 27, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint · F-0835 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · from a complaint · F-0838 |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · from a complaint · F-0806 |
| Feb 13, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | 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 25, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Oct 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 16, 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. · F-0657 |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Oct 16, 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. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| Oct 16, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0644 |
| Oct 16, 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 |
| Oct 16, 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Oct 16, 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 |
| Nov 10, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 10, 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 |
| Nov 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Nov 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Nov 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Nov 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 10, 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 |
| Jan 23, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 23, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jan 23, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 23, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Jan 23, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 4).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 4
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 9 | 4 | K ▲ |
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 facilityNew York averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 2.71
New York average: 3.58
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.69
New York average: 0.68
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.51
New York average: 3.13
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New York avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 2.71 | 3.58 | 3.95 | bottom 9% in New York; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.69 | 0.68 | 0.69 | top 33% in New York; top 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.51 | 3.13 | 3.50 | bottom 16% in New York; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.67 | 0.48 | 0.48 | top 17% in New York; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 27.5 | 40.3 | 45.8 | top 21% in New York; top 10% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 35.7 | 39.8 | 42.9 | top 45% in New York; top 39% 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 3.36, RN 0.85, weekend 3.11.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.36 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Clove Lakes Health Care and Rehabilitation 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demisay, Bernadette | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 10% | 02/15/2017 |
| Demisay, Helene | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 70% | 02/15/2017 |
| Demisay, Michael | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 10% | 02/15/2017 |
| Klein, Solomon | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 10% | 02/01/2021 |
| Demisay, Michael | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/20/1997 |
| Senk, Lorri | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/15/2012 |
All 6 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 Infinite Care — 8 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.
- Golden Hill Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Kingston, NY · overall 3/5
- Hudson Hill Center for Rehabilitation & Nursing — Yonkers, NY · overall 1/5abuse
- Sarah Neuman Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing — Mamaroneck, NY · overall 2/5
- Yonkers Gardens Center for Nursing and Rehab — Yonkers, NY · overall 1/5
- Forest Hills Center for Rehabilitation and Healing — Newark, NJ · overall 2/5
- Redbank Center for Rehabilitation and Healing — Red Bank, NJ · overall 2/5
- Buena Vida Rehab and Nursing Center — Brooklyn, NY · overall 3/5
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.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the New York 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 28% 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 228 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Gate Rehabilitation & Health Care Center | 0.5 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Sea View Hospital Rehabilitation Center and Home | 1.2 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Carmel Richmond Healthcare and Rehabilitation Cent | 1.9 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Archcare at Eger Health Care and Rehabilitation Ce | 2.1 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Silver Lake Specialized Rehabilitation and Care Ce | 2.4 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Richmond Center for Rehabilitation and Specialty H | 2.5 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Verrazano Nursing and Post-Acute Center | 2.6 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| New Vanderbilt Rehabilitation and Care Center, INC | 2.6 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Staten Island Care Center | 2.7 mi | Staten Island, NY | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bayonne University Hospital | 4.1 mi | Bayonne, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Hamilton Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 5.2 mi | Brooklyn, NY | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Trinitas Hospital | 5.2 mi | Elizabeth, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 335239.