New Jersey ›Keansburg

Laurel Bay Health & Rehabilitation Center

32 Laurel Avenue, Keansburg, NJ 07734 · Monmouth County · 123 certified beds · avg 86 residents/day · certified since Mar 18, 1998

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$15,873
Fines, last 3 years
3.44
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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 · Jul 3, 2025 · 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: Aug 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (22)

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
Jul 3, 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. · from a complaint
Jul 3, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Jul 3, 2025D · 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
Jan 7, 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.
Jan 7, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jan 7, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jan 7, 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.
Jan 7, 2025D · 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.
Jan 7, 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.
Jan 7, 2025D · 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.
Jan 7, 2025D · 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.
Jan 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint
Jan 7, 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.
Jan 7, 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.
Jan 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Jan 18, 2024D · 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
Jan 18, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Jan 18, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training.
Sep 7, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Sep 7, 2021D · 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.
Sep 7, 2021D · 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.
Sep 7, 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 12).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202140E
202430D
2025151J ▲

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 $15,873.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jul 3, 2025Fine$15,873

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

MeasureThis facilityNew Jersey avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.443.883.95bottom 34% in New Jersey; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.570.670.69top 50% in New Jersey; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.993.533.50bottom 23% in New Jersey; bottom 30% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.290.500.48bottom 26% in New Jersey; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)28.039.745.8top 19% in New Jersey; top 11% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.037.742.9top 1% in New Jersey; top 1% 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 2.80, RN 0.47, weekend 2.43. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Willinger, JoelIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE03/18/1998
Greenberger, EricIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2010
Greenberger, EricIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2010
Raj, VinuthaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2025
Willinger, JoelIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE03/18/1998
Willinger, JoelIndividualTrustee of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/18/1998
Willinger, JoelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/18/1998

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
Arnold Walter Nursing & Rehabilitation Center1.8 miHazlet, NJ★★★☆☆2/5
Anchor Care and Rehabilitation Center3.1 miHazlet, NJ★★★★☆4/5
Complete Care at Bayshore LLC3.9 miHolmdel, NJ★★★★☆3/5
Careone at Middletown5.6 miAtlantic Highlands, NJ★★☆☆☆2/5
Meadowbrook Respiratory and Nursing Center6.0 miMatawan, NJ★★★★☆4/5
Complete Care at Madison, LLC6.0 miMatawan, NJ★★★★★4/5
Careone at Holmdel6.3 miHolmdel, NJ★★★★★4/5
Venetian Care & Rehabilitation Center, LLC7.1 miSouth Amboy, NJ★★☆☆☆1/5
Atrium at Navesink Harbor, the7.7 miRed Bank, NJ★★☆☆☆1/5
De la Salle Hall8.0 miLincroft, NJ★★★★★4/5
Alameda Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare8.1 miPerth Amboy, NJ★★★★☆3/5
Complete Care at Shrewsbury LLC8.2 miShrewsbury, NJ★★★☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Keansburg →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315437.