How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Merwick Care & Rehabilitation Center, LLC
100 Plainsboro Road, Plainsboro, NJ 08536 (opens Google Maps) · Middlesex County · (609) 759-6000· 200 certified beds · avg 173 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967 · 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★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 25, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.16
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 31 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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 protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint F-0842
View all 31 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 19, 2026 | 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 |
| May 19, 2026 | 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 19, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 25, 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 25, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 25, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 25, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 25, 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. · F-0658 |
| Apr 25, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 25, 2025 | 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. · F-0755 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0677 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 22, 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Nov 22, 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 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 15, 2021 | 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. · F-0842 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 15, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Dec 15, 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 15, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0677 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Dec 15, 2021 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityNew Jersey averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.16
New Jersey average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.73
New Jersey average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.90
New Jersey average: 3.53
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.16 | 3.88 | 3.95 | bottom 12% in New Jersey; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.73 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 29% in New Jersey; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.90 | 3.53 | 3.50 | bottom 16% in New Jersey; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.56 | 0.50 | 0.48 | top 28% in New Jersey; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 29.7 | 39.7 | 45.8 | top 23% in New Jersey; top 14% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 37.0 | 37.7 | 42.9 | bottom 49% in New Jersey; top 42% 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 3.05, RN 0.71, weekend 2.80.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.05 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: 5/5 · 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 Merwick Care & Rehabilitation Center, LLC. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacobs, Hyman | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 95% | 08/22/2007 |
| Jacobs, Livia | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 5% | 08/22/2007 |
| Joseph, Jean | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/03/2018 |
| Metternich, Christopher | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/17/2017 |
All 4 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 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.
- Mount Holly Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Lumberton, NJ · overall 1/5abuse
- Oakland Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Oakland, NJ · overall 3/5
- Seacrest Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Little Egg Harbor TW, NJ · overall 3/5
- Spring Grove Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — New Providence, NJ · overall 3/5
- Willow Springs Rehabilitation and Healthcare Cente — Brick, NJ · overall 4/5
- Alpine Valley Post Acute and Healthcare Center — Lebanon, PA · overall 5/5
- Capitol Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Harrisburg, PA · overall 3/5
- Cedar Crest Post Acute — Allentown, PA · overall 4/5
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.
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?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the New Jersey 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 30% 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 57 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carnegie Post Acute Care at Princeton LLC | 1.4 mi | Princeton, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Park Place LLC | 3.4 mi | Monmouth Junction, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stonebridge at Montgomery Health Care Center | 5.3 mi | Skillman, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Elms Rehab and Healthcare Center of Cranbury | 6.1 mi | Cranbury, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Avalon Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 6.3 mi | Hamilton, NJ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Clover Meadows Healthcare and Rehabilitation Cente | 6.3 mi | Lawrenceville, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Lawrence Rehabilitation Hospital | 6.7 mi | Lawrenceville, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lawrence Rehab & Hcc/The Meadows at Lawrence | 6.9 mi | Lawrenceville, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Meadow Lakes | 7.8 mi | East Windsor, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Preferred Care at Hamilton | 8.0 mi | Hamilton Square, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Cranbury Center | 8.1 mi | Monroe Township, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Complete Care at Mercerville LLC | 8.3 mi | Hamilton Township, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Middlesex, NJ — 25 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- New Jersey Veterans Memorial Home Menlo — Edison, NJ · overall 5/5
- Preferred Care at Old Bridge, LLC — Old Bridge, NJ · overall 5/5
- Reformed Church Home — Old Bridge, NJ · overall 5/5
- Roosevelt Care Center — Edison, NJ · overall 5/5
- Roosevelt Care Center at Old Bridge — Old Bridge, NJ · overall 5/5
- Rose Mountain Care Center — New Brunswick, NJ · overall 4/5
- Spring Creek Healthcare Center — Perth Amboy, NJ · overall 4/5
- St Joseph's Home Al & NC, INC — Woodbridge, NJ · overall 5/5
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 315001.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).