Excel Care at Dover

Name: Excel Care at Dover
Address: 65 NORTH SUSSEX STREET, Dover, NJ, 07801, US
Telephone: 9733615200

65 North Sussex Street, Dover, NJ 07801 · Morris County · 155 certified beds · avg 144 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 1996

Part of chain: EXCELCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)

1/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

$139,113

Fines, last 3 years

3.81

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

⚠ 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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 6, 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): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Apr 22, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · May 2, 2022 · F-0689

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): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.

Corrected: Jul 8, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, repeated · May 31, 2024 · F-0689

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 (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.

Corrected: Jul 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (36)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Mar 6, 2026	▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off	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
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
May 31, 2024	▲ H · Actual harm, repeated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents.
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
May 31, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Mar 21, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Mar 21, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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. · from a complaint
May 2, 2022	▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
May 2, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
May 2, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
May 2, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule.
May 2, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
May 2, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
May 2, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
May 2, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
May 2, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
May 2, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
May 2, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 22, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to receive the visitors they choose, at the times they choose.
Apr 22, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Apr 22, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 17).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2021	3	0	D
2022	11	1	K ▲
2024	19	1	H ▲
2026	3	1	J ▲

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)

1 fine totaling $139,113.

Date	Type	Amount / length
May 31, 2024	Fine	$139,113

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

Measure	This facility	New Jersey avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.81	3.88	3.95	top 41% in New Jersey; top 48% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.70	0.67	0.69	top 33% in New Jersey; top 37% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.65	3.53	3.50	top 31% in New Jersey; top 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.45	0.50	0.48	top 42% in New Jersey; top 40% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	43.7	39.7	45.8	bottom 36% in New Jersey; top 46% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	40.0	37.7	42.9	bottom 44% in New Jersey; top 46% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.64, RN 0.67, weekend 3.49. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Frankel, Eliyahu	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	95%	12/20/2021
Frankel, Rochel	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	5%	12/20/2021
Attentive Healthcare LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/20/2021
Blackmon, Kristen	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	10/28/2024
Blackmon, Kristen	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/28/2024
Duran, Maurice	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	12/25/2022
Duran, Maurice	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/05/2022
Frankel, Eliyahu	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	12/20/2021
Frankel, Eliyahu	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/20/2021
Grandison Nursing	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/20/2021
Martin Friedman Cpa, P.C.	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/20/2021
Twomagnets LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/20/2021

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"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?"
"What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
"What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Dwelling Place at St Clares	0.8 mi	Dover, NJ	★★★★★	4/5
Morris View Healthcare Center	4.2 mi	Morristown, NJ	★★☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Oaks at Denville, the	4.9 mi	Denville, NJ	★★★★☆	3/5
Merry Heart Nursing Home	5.2 mi	Succasunna, NJ	★★★★☆	4/5
Holly Manor Center	5.9 mi	Mendham, NJ	★★★☆☆	2/5
Fallsview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center	7.2 mi	Boonton, NJ	★★★☆☆	2/5
Careone at Madison Avenue	7.9 mi	Morristown, NJ	★★★☆☆	2/5
Morristown Post Acute Rehab and Nursing Center	7.9 mi	Morristown, NJ	★★★★★	4/5
Careone at Parsippany	8.5 mi	Parsippany Troy Hill, NJ	★★★★☆	3/5
Troy Hills Center	8.6 mi	Parsippany, NJ	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Careone at Hanover Township	8.6 mi	Whippany, NJ	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Florham Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center	9.9 mi	Florham Park, NJ	★★★★★	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Dover →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315355.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Excel Care at Dover

65 North Sussex Street, Dover, NJ 07801 · 9733615200

Health inspection rating 1/5 · CMS overall 2/5· Fines (3y): $139,113

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Mar 6, 2026 (F-0600, Immediate jeopardy, one-off): 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.
▲ May 2, 2022 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, repeated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ May 31, 2024 (F-0689, Actual harm, repeated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "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?"
☐ "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
☐ "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 315355 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)