100 Warren Circle, Storrs Mansfield, CT 06268 (opens Google Maps) · Capitol County · (860) 487-2300· 98 certified beds · avg 84 residents/day · certified since Feb 16, 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: NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES (42 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 4, 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 (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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 25, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 10, 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 (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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: May 30, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 11, 2023 · 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 (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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: May 23, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0761
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 F-0580
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint F-0755
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0580 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Dec 4, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, 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 |
| Dec 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, 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 |
| Apr 10, 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 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Apr 10, 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 |
| Jan 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 13, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Jan 2, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0580 |
| Nov 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0585 |
| Nov 26, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jul 18, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Apr 11, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Apr 11, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Apr 11, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 11, 2023 | 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 11, 2023 | 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 11, 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 |
| Apr 11, 2023 | 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 11, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 11, 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 |
| Apr 11, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0580 |
| Mar 12, 2020 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2020 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2020 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2020 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2020 | C · Potential for 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 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 5).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 11 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 0 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
2 fines totaling $24,460.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 4, 2025 | Fine | $11,190 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | Fine | $13,270 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 3.46 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 36% in Connecticut; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.65 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 43% in Connecticut; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.23 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 41% in Connecticut; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.47 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 36% in Connecticut; top 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 37.4 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.6 | 42.9 | — |
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 3.86, RN 0.72, weekend 3.61.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.86 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Mansfield Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation. 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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 28% | 08/01/2024 |
| David Ostreicher Family Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Gilmartin, Thomas | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Ilana Ostreicher Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 08/01/2024 |
| Juniper Capital Associates LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 20% | 08/01/2024 |
| Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 08/01/2024 |
| Oak Management Capital LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 20% | 08/01/2024 |
| Ostreicher, David | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Ostreicher, Ilana | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Ostreicher, Marc | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Ostreicher, Michelle | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Shayna Steg Family Trust | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Steg, Shayna | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Ysro Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 20% | 08/01/2024 |
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| David Ostreicher Family Trust | Organization | Trustee of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| David Ostreicher Family Trust | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Harris, Brian | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
Showing 20 of 53 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 33 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain National Health Care Associates — 42 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 41 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vanderman Place | 5.5 mi | Willimantic, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Saint Josephs Living Center INC | 6.4 mi | Windham, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Douglas Manor | 7.6 mi | Windham, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Woodlake at Tolland | 10.0 mi | Tolland, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Fox Hill | 10.5 mi | Vernon, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Vernon Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 12.4 mi | Vernon, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Evergreen Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 14.6 mi | Stafford Springs, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pierce Memorial Baptist Home, INC. | 15.4 mi | Brooklyn, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Westside Care Center | 15.4 mi | Manchester, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Marlborough Health & Rehabilitation Center | 15.4 mi | Marlborough, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Touchpoints at Manchester | 15.6 mi | Manchester, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Complete Care at Harrington Court | 15.7 mi | Colchester, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
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 075402.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details