How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Jefferson House
1 John H Stewart Dr, Newington, CT 06111 (opens Google Maps) · Capitol County · (860) 667-4453· 104 certified beds · avg 98 residents/day · certified since Sep 24, 1979 · 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 Jan 28, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.26
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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 25 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. F-0851
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
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
View all 25 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | 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 28, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0638 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0640 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Dec 4, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0602 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 29, 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. · F-0656 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 29, 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. · F-0761 |
| Jul 6, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Jul 6, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jul 6, 2021 | 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 |
| Jul 6, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Jul 6, 2021 | 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 |
| Jul 6, 2021 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | F |
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 facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.26
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 2.01
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.61
Connecticut average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Connecticut avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.26 | 3.80 | 3.95 | top 7% in Connecticut; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 2.01 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 1% in Connecticut; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.61 | 3.43 | 3.50 | top 8% in Connecticut; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.36 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 2% in Connecticut; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 31.0 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 29% in Connecticut; top 16% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 19.6 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 16% in Connecticut; top 13% 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 5.17, RN 1.98, weekend 4.53.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.17 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: 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 Jefferson House. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Regional context: $525.78/day — Connecticut statewide average for a semi-private nursing-facility room, September 30, 2025. This is a historical regional figure, not this facility's price or a prediction. View the OPM source.
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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agba, Chibueze | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/09/2021 |
| Baranik, David | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/31/2016 |
| Boisvert, Gerald | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/11/2013 |
| Kosturko, Maryellen | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/10/2024 |
| Patel, Bimal | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2024 |
| Robbins, Jeffrey | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/08/2025 |
| Robbins, Jeffrey | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/10/2025 |
| Robbins, Jeffrey | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/10/2025 |
| Smullen, Eric | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/09/2021 |
| Vinal, Susan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/10/2013 |
| Vinal, Susan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/14/2025 |
All 11 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.
- "How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
- "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
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 31% 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 78 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bel-Air Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 1.7 mi | Newington, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Civita Care Center at Newington | 2.4 mi | Newington, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Avery Nursing Home/Noble Building | 2.6 mi | Hartford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center | 3.0 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at New Britain | 3.1 mi | New Britain, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Trinity Hill Care Center | 3.7 mi | Hartford, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Parkville Care Center | 4.1 mi | Hartford, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Amberwoods of Farmington | 4.2 mi | Farmington, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Grandview Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 4.3 mi | New Britain, CT | —/5 | abuseSFF | |
| John L. Levitow Health Care Center | 4.4 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Rocky Hill | 4.4 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Monsignor Bojnowski Manor, INC | 4.5 mi | New Britain, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Capitol, CT — 65 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Jerome Home — New Britain, CT · overall 5/5
- Ledgecrest Health Care Center — Kensington, CT · overall 4/5
- Livewell Connecticut — Plantsville, CT · overall 5/5
- Manchester Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Manchester, CT · overall 5/5
- Mansfield Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation — Storrs Mansfield, CT · overall 2/5
- Marlborough Health & Rehabilitation Center — Marlborough, CT · overall 3/5abuse
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 075293.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).