How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center
856 Maple St, Rocky Hill, CT 06067 (opens Google Maps) · Capitol County · (860) 563-2861· 120 certified beds · avg 109 residents/day · certified since Mar 20, 1975 · 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★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 13, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.14
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: ★★★★★5/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · how star ratings work →
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 21 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 honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. F-0565
The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. F-0561
View all 21 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2025 | 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 |
| May 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| May 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561 |
| May 13, 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| May 13, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | 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 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 22, 2019 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 4).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 1 | 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.
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: 3.14
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.44
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.95
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) | 3.14 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 12% in Connecticut; bottom 19% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.44 | 0.70 | 0.69 | bottom 21% in Connecticut; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.95 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 18% in Connecticut; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.29 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 30% in Connecticut; bottom 30% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 24.7 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 14% in Connecticut; top 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 6.7 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 1% in Connecticut; top 3% 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 3.54, RN 0.50, weekend 3.32.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.54 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5 · 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 Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edsr Associates, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 12/01/2020 |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/07/2010 |
| Senga Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 11/30/2020 |
| Susan Ostreicher 2012 Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 25% | 12/01/2020 |
| Zitter, Agnes | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 11/30/2020 |
| Abramson, Lew | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/12/2017 |
| Ostreicher, Marvin | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/07/2010 |
All 7 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
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.
- Marlborough Health & Rehabilitation Center — Marlborough, CT · overall 3/5abuse
- Milford Health and Rehabilitation Center — Milford, CT · overall 5/5
- Montowese Center for Health & Rehabilitation — North Haven, CT · overall 2/5
- Pines at Bristol for Nursing & Rehabilitation, the — Bristol, CT · overall 4/5
- Regency House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Wallingford, CT · overall 5/5
- Riverside Health & Rehabilitation Center — East Hartford, CT · overall 2/5abuse
- Shady Knoll Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Seymour, CT · overall 2/5
- Sharon Center for Health & Rehabilitation — Sharon, CT · overall 4/5
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.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Does your facility have an active resident council, and how does management respond to its concerns?"
- "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Connecticut midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 25% 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 79 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple Rehab Rocky Hill | 1.5 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| John L. Levitow Health Care Center | 1.6 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| 60 West | 1.8 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Jefferson House | 3.0 mi | Newington, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bel-Air Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 3.4 mi | Newington, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Civita Care Center at Newington | 3.8 mi | Newington, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Civita Care Center at Salmon Brook | 4.4 mi | Glastonbury, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Avery Nursing Home/Noble Building | 4.6 mi | Hartford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Pilgrim Manor | 5.1 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Cromwell | 5.2 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Cromwell | 5.2 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Trinity Hill Care Center | 5.4 mi | Hartford, 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.
- Marlborough Health & Rehabilitation Center — Marlborough, CT · overall 3/5abuse
- McLean Health Center — Simsbury, CT · overall 5/5
- Monsignor Bojnowski Manor, INC — New Britain, CT · overall 3/5abuse
- Parkville Care Center — Hartford, CT · overall 3/5
- Parkway Pavilion Health and Rehabilitation Center — Enfield, CT · overall 1/5abuse
- Riverside Health & Rehabilitation Center — East Hartford, CT · overall 2/5abuse
- Saint Mary Home — West Hartford, 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 075238.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).