How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
District of Columbia ›Washington
Forest Hills of DC
4901 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20008 (opens Google Maps) · The District County · (202) 966-7623· 55 certified beds · avg 50 residents/day · certified since Dec 27, 2000 · 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 →
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 6, 2024
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 9, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.59
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 9, 2023 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 9, 2023 · 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: Dec 6, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 46 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0582
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. · from a complaint F-0756
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. · from a complaint F-0812
View all 46 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0582 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0756 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint · F-0908 |
| Mar 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925 |
| Dec 27, 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 |
| Dec 27, 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 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0757 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 6, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Dec 6, 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 |
| Dec 6, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Dec 6, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Dec 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · from a complaint · F-0881 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | ▲ 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 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0625 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · from a complaint · F-0849 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not post the names, addresses, and phone numbers of state agencies and advocacy groups, along with a notice that residents may file complaints with the state survey agency. · from a complaint · F-0575 |
| Aug 9, 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. · from a complaint · F-0623 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 9, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · from a complaint · F-0685 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0803 |
| Aug 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568 |
| Feb 25, 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0607 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 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 |
| Feb 25, 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2022 | 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. · F-0842 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 5).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 6
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 13 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 6 | 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 facilityDistrict of Columbia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.59
District of Columbia average: 4.76
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.61
District of Columbia average: 1.48
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.52
District of Columbia average: 4.35
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | District of Columbia avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.59 | 4.76 | 3.95 | bottom 47% in District of Columbia; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.61 | 1.48 | 0.69 | top 20% in District of Columbia; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.52 | 4.35 | 3.50 | top 40% in District of Columbia; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.47 | 1.28 | 0.48 | top 27% in District of Columbia; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 25.5 | 34.0 | 45.8 | top 20% in District of Columbia; top 8% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 36.8 | 32.5 | 42.9 | bottom 47% in District of Columbia; top 41% 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 4.49, RN 1.57, weekend 4.42.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.49 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · 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 Forest Hills of DC. 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 →
Non profit - Other
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Al-Askari, Yasamin | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Clark, Cyrillene | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Eskew, Tucker | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Fiske, Kimberly | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2026 |
| Reid, Dahlia | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/15/2022 |
| Reid, Dahlia | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/29/2026 |
| Sandri, Tina | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Sandri, Tina | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Scott, Crystal | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/13/2020 |
| Scott, Crystal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/18/2026 |
All 10 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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?"
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
- "How is pest control handled here, and when was the last treatment or inspection?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
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 26% 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 94 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ingleside at Rock Creek | 0.7 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lisner Louise Dickson Hurthome | 1.0 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Knollwood HSC | 1.5 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stoddard Baptist Nursing Home | 2.0 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sibley Mem Hosp Renaissance | 2.5 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Chevy Chase | 3.1 mi | Chevy Chase, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fox Chase Healthcare | 3.2 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Inspire Rehabilitation and Health Center LLC | 3.3 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Jeanne Jugan Residence | 3.7 mi | Washington, DC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Woodside Rehab & Nursing | 3.8 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Ascension Living Carroll Manor | 3.9 mi | Washington, DC | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Carriage Hill Bethesda | 4.0 mi | Bethesda, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in The District, DC — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Harborside Health & Rehabilitation — Washington, DC · overall 2/5
- Serenity Rehabilitation and Health Center LLC — Washington, DC · overall 4/5
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 095038.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).