Maryland ›Silver Spring

Harmony Suites Rehabilitation and Wellness Center

13908 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20904 · Montgomery County · 100 certified beds · avg 86 residents/day · certified since Apr 1, 1969

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$61,269
Fines, last 3 years
4.00
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 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 20, 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 (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: Oct 31, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Feb 4, 2025 · 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 (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: Mar 19, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (61)

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
May 15, 2026D · 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
Mar 20, 2026▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Mar 20, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 20, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Mar 20, 2026D · 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
Mar 20, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Feb 4, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Feb 4, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Feb 4, 2025D · 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 4, 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.
Feb 4, 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · 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.
Feb 4, 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · 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 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Feb 4, 2025D · 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.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Feb 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 4, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Oct 2, 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
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 2, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint
Feb 3, 2020E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have policies on smoking.
Feb 3, 2020D · 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.
Feb 3, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Feb 3, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not bring in qualified outside professionals to provide a required service when it didn't have a qualified professional on staff.
Feb 3, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Feb 3, 2020C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Feb 3, 2020B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 29, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 29, 2019D · 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.
Mar 29, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Mar 29, 2019D · 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.
Mar 29, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Mar 29, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Mar 29, 2019B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 29, 2019B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 24).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2019100E
202070E
2024120E
2025261J ▲
202661J ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $61,269.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 20, 2026Fine$12,740
Feb 4, 2025Fine$48,529

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

MeasureThis facilityMaryland avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.003.833.95top 26% in Maryland; top 39% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.040.830.69top 18% in Maryland; top 14% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.493.433.50top 31% in Maryland; top 42% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.880.630.48top 16% in Maryland; top 9% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)49.340.245.8bottom 27% in Maryland; bottom 39% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)55.638.742.9bottom 16% in Maryland; bottom 28% 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 4.15, RN 1.08, weekend 3.62. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ownership Data Not Available

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
Complete Care at Springbrook1.7 miSilver Spring, MD★★★☆☆3/5
Fairland Center1.8 miSilver Spring, MD★★☆☆☆2/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Silver Spring2.5 miSilver Spring, MD★★★☆☆3/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Oak Manor3.4 miBurtonsville, MD★★★★☆3/5
Layhill Nursing and Rehabilitation Center3.4 miSilver Spring, MD★☆☆☆☆1/5
Riderwood Village3.4 miSilver Spring, MD★★★★★5/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Arcola3.5 miSilver Spring, MD★★★★☆3/5
Montcare at Wheaton3.5 miWheaton, MD★★★☆☆2/5
Friends Nursing Home4.2 miSandy Spring, MD★★★★★4/5
Bedford Court Healthcare Cent.4.2 miSilver Spring, MD★★★★★4/5
Sterling Care Hillhaven4.4 miAdelphi, MD★★★★★5/5
Complete Care at Wheaton4.5 miWheaton, MD★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Silver Spring →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 215065.