ConnecticutGlastonbury

Glastonbury Center for Health & Rehabilitation

1175 Hebron Ave, Glastonbury, CT 06033 · Capitol County · 105 certified beds · avg 97 residents/day · certified since Feb 10, 1988

Part of chain: NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES (42 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.77
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (40)

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

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Sep 23, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records.
Sep 23, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Sep 23, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Sep 23, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Sep 23, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
May 14, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Sep 16, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 16, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Jun 5, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 5, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Feb 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to share a room with their spouse or a roommate of their choosing, or moved residents to a different room without written notice beforehand.
Feb 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Feb 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Feb 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Feb 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Feb 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 14, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Sep 14, 2021B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that.
Sep 14, 2021B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 12).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2021100D
2024150E
2025150F

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

MeasureThis facilityConnecticut avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.773.803.95top 42% in Connecticut; bottom 50% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.590.700.69bottom 48% in Connecticut; top 49% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.353.433.50top 47% in Connecticut; bottom 50% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.380.460.48bottom 48% in Connecticut; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)27.637.445.8top 21% in Connecticut; top 10% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)26.738.642.9top 27% in Connecticut; top 24% 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 3.81, RN 0.60, weekend 3.39. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
BG II Opco ML LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%10/10/2024
Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Dymer Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Ehrenfeld, MindyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Ilana Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Juniper Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Oak Management Capital LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Ysro TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Zadun II Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/10/2024
Alvi, SalmaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Baker Tilly Advisory Group LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/11/2024
Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Chadderton, KarenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Chadderton, KarenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/02/2025
Dymer Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Gilmartin, ThomasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Gilmartin, ThomasIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Ilana Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Security InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Civita Care Center at Salmon Brook2.0 miGlastonbury, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5
Touchpoints at Manchester3.0 miManchester, CT★★★★☆4/5
Westside Care Center3.1 miManchester, CT★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Manchester Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center3.6 miManchester, CT★★★★★4/5
Riverside Health & Rehabilitation Center5.3 miEast Hartford, CT★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Apple Rehab Rocky Hill5.3 miRocky Hill, CT★★☆☆☆2/5
60 West5.9 miRocky Hill, CT★★★★★5/5
Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center6.0 miRocky Hill, CT★★★★★5/5
John L. Levitow Health Care Center6.4 miRocky Hill, CT★★★★★4/5
Marlborough Health & Rehabilitation Center6.6 miMarlborough, CT★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Trinity Hill Care Center7.1 miHartford, CT★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Avery Nursing Home/Noble Building7.3 miHartford, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Glastonbury →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075316.