1 Bishops Drive, Lawrenceville, NJ 08648 (opens Google Maps) · Mercer County · (609) 896-0006· 180 certified beds · avg 159 residents/day · certified since Nov 7, 1994 · 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 →
Part of chain: MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES (87 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 1, 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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Nov 22, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). F-0628
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 1, 2025 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | 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 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Sep 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Apr 3, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Aug 5, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0558 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0610 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0558 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to manage their own money and financial affairs. · F-0567 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0610 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | 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. · F-0623 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0695 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | 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. · F-0812 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 21, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 8).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 10 | 1 | J ▲ |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $17,345.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 2025 | Fine | $17,345 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New Jersey avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.73 | 3.88 | 3.95 | top 45% in New Jersey; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.59 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 46% in New Jersey; top 50% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.42 | 3.53 | 3.50 | top 43% in New Jersey; top 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.42 | 0.50 | 0.48 | top 46% in New Jersey; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 37.7 | 39.7 | 45.8 | top 44% in New Jersey; top 30% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 37.7 | 42.9 | bottom 26% in New Jersey; bottom 39% 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 3.66, RN 0.57, weekend 3.35.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.66 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lawrence Rehab & Hcc/The Meadows at Lawrence. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khan, Sunniya | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Khan, Sunniya | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Lawrence Real Property LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| NFR 2020 Irrv Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Nutraco LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Nutraco LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/14/2025 |
| Onyenemezu, Jenelle | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/24/2024 |
| Onyenemezu, Jenelle | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/24/2024 |
| Posen, Mindee | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Posen, Mindee | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Quinto Nexgen LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Rsbrmk Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Shah, Umang | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2024 |
| Shah, Umang | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2024 |
| Shah, Umang | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2024 |
| Shah, Umang | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2024 |
| SK Nexgen Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Synovous Bank, National Association | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
Showing 20 of 25 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 5 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Marquis Health Services — 87 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 86 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lawrence Rehabilitation Hospital | 0.2 mi | Lawrenceville, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Clover Meadows Healthcare and Rehabilitation Cente | 1.1 mi | Lawrenceville, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Avant Rehabilitation and Care Center | 3.1 mi | Trenton, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Preferred Care at Mercer | 3.8 mi | Ewing, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Greenwood House Home for the Jewish Aged | 3.8 mi | Trenton, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Hamilton Grove Healthcare and Rehabilitation, LLC | 4.3 mi | Hamilton, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Belle Care Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 4.5 mi | Trenton, NJ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Avalon Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 4.9 mi | Hamilton, NJ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Complete Care at Mercerville LLC | 4.9 mi | Hamilton Township, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Trenton Gardens Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 5.7 mi | Trenton, NJ | —/5 | SFF | |
| Preferred Care at Hamilton | 5.9 mi | Hamilton Square, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Accela Post Acute Care at Hamilton | 5.9 mi | Hamilton, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Mercer, NJ — 16 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 315338.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details