Mary Wade Home
118 Clinton Ave, New Haven, CT 06513 · South Central Ct County · 45 certified beds · avg 84 residents/day · certified since Sep 11, 1989
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$20,144
Fines, last 3 years
5.07
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 1, 2023 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Dec 1, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (51)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Nov 13, 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 27, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 6, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Feb 25, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 25, 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. |
| Feb 25, 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. |
| Feb 25, 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 25, 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. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or maintain an effective training program for its direct care staff, including training on how to communicate effectively with residents. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Dec 9, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Dec 9, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 15, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · from a complaint |
| Nov 1, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Nov 1, 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 1, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jan 4, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Feb 6, 2020 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Feb 6, 2020 | 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 (19 → 15).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 22 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 20 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 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)
2 fines totaling $20,144.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 25, 2025 | Fine | $12,701 |
| Nov 1, 2023 | Fine | $7,443 |
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) | 5.07 | 3.80 | 3.95 | top 9% in Connecticut; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.60 | 0.70 | 0.69 | bottom 49% in Connecticut; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.43 | 3.43 | 3.50 | top 10% in Connecticut; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.34 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 41% in Connecticut; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 51.8 | 37.4 | 45.8 | bottom 11% in Connecticut; bottom 32% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 58.3 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 14% in Connecticut; bottom 24% 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 4.76, RN 0.56, weekend 4.16. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adams, Barbara | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2017 |
| Canavan, Marybeth | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Ginter, William | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/05/2019 |
| Gnun, Patricia | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Goldberg, Al | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Hunter, David | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/1983 |
| Kessler, Robert | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/15/2019 |
| McFarlane, Brandon | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/24/2019 |
| McGloin, Joanne | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2018 |
| Rodriguez, Michelle | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/24/2019 |
| Spitzer, Harold | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Stanton, Pamela | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2017 |
| Topolosky, Bruce | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/30/2018 |
| Wnek, Brian | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
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?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "Under what circumstances, if any, would a resident ever be kept in their room or separated from others?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How often do you evaluate your nurse aides and what ongoing training do they receive?"
- "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 | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New Haven Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC | 0.7 mi | New Haven, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Leeway, INC | 1.0 mi | New Haven, CT | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Laurel Woods | 1.9 mi | East Haven, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Grimes Center | 2.5 mi | New Haven, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Advanced Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation | 2.6 mi | New Haven, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Montowese Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 2.8 mi | North Haven, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Whitney Center | 2.8 mi | Hamden, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Whispering Pines Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 3.7 mi | East Haven, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Ark Healthcare & Rehabilitation at Branford Hills | 4.1 mi | Branford, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| West Haven Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation | 4.5 mi | West Haven, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Arden Care Center | 4.6 mi | Hamden, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Apple Rehab West Haven | 4.8 mi | West Haven, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075325.