Lutheran Home of Southbury INC

Name: Lutheran Home of Southbury INC
Address: 990 NORTH MAIN STREET, Southbury, CT, 06488, US
Telephone: 2032649135

990 North Main Street, Southbury, CT 06488 · Naugatuck Vly County · 120 certified beds · avg 116 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 1991

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

4.45

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 (35)

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

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
May 27, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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
May 27, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Dec 1, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Dec 1, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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). · from a complaint
Dec 1, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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 17, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Jun 17, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not protect residents from being involuntarily separated — kept apart from other residents, kept out of their own room, or confined to their room. Isolating a resident this way is a form of mistreatment.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Jun 17, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals.
Feb 5, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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
Feb 5, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint
Sep 23, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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. · from a complaint
Sep 23, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint
Sep 23, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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. · from a complaint
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Aug 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 29, 2023	B · Minimal risk, repeated	The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Jul 20, 2021	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jul 20, 2021	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jul 20, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Jul 20, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jul 20, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jul 20, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Jul 20, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 10).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2021	7	E
2023	8	D
2024	3	D
2025	15	E
2026	2	D

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)

Measure	This facility	Connecticut avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	4.45	3.80	3.95	top 20% in Connecticut; top 25% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.66	0.70	0.69	top 41% in Connecticut; top 41% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.87	3.43	3.50	top 22% in Connecticut; top 27% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.26	0.46	0.48	bottom 20% in Connecticut; bottom 23% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	49.2	37.4	45.8	bottom 14% in Connecticut; bottom 39% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	52.6	38.6	42.9	bottom 22% in Connecticut; bottom 32% 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 4.25, RN 0.63, weekend 3.69. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Ascentria Care Alliance INC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/08/2015
Ascentria Care Alliance INC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	03/25/2025
Baroody, Ziad	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Baroody, Ziad	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Bartholomew, Alexander	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Bartholomew, Alexander	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Bovill, Angela	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/2018
Bovill, Angela	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2014
Bovill, Angela	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/02/2025
Browne, Tara	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Browne, Tara	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/14/2024
Cowlagi, Ashish	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Goodman, Ross	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2013
Hanscom, Kristin	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Hanscom, Kristin	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/30/2024
Khan, Ghulam	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Khan, Ghulam	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Mayo, William	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2014
Oneal, Gary	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Oneal, Gary	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/14/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
"What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
"Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
"Under what circumstances, if any, would a resident ever be kept in their room or separated from others?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
"If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection
Pomperaug Woods Health Center	1.4 mi	Southbury, CT	★★★★☆	3/5
River Glen Health Care Center	3.3 mi	Southbury, CT	★★★★★	4/5
Complete Care at Middlebury	5.4 mi	Middlebury, CT	★★★★★	5/5
Apple Rehab Watertown	7.7 mi	Watertown, CT	★★★★☆	4/5
Waterbury Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC	8.4 mi	Waterbury, CT	★★★★★	4/5
Stone Bridge Center for Health & Rehabilitation	9.0 mi	Newtown, CT	★★★★☆	3/5
Complete Care at Glendale	9.4 mi	Naugatuck, CT	★★★★☆	3/5
Beacon Brook Center for Health & Rehabilitation	9.6 mi	Naugatuck, CT	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Shady Knoll Center for Health & Rehabilitation	10.7 mi	Seymour, CT	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Bethel Health Care Center	11.2 mi	Bethel, CT	★★★★☆	4/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Bucks Hill	11.3 mi	Waterbury, CT	★★★★☆	3/5
Village Crest Center for Health & Rehabilitation	11.6 mi	New Milford, CT	★★★★☆	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Southbury →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075371.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Lutheran Home of Southbury INC

990 North Main Street, Southbury, CT 06488 · 2032649135

Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 3/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
☐ "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
☐ "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
☐ "Under what circumstances, if any, would a resident ever be kept in their room or separated from others?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 075371 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)