Monsignor Bojnowski Manor, INC

Name: Monsignor Bojnowski Manor, INC
Address: 50 PULASKI STREET, New Britain, CT, 06053, US
Telephone: 8602290336

50 Pulaski Street, New Britain, CT 06053 · Capitol County · 60 certified beds · avg 54 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1992

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.

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

$21,991

Fines, last 3 years

3.96

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 16, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Feb 27, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (37)

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
Mar 2, 2026	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
Mar 2, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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. · from a complaint
Mar 2, 2026	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
Feb 4, 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 4, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Feb 4, 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 4, 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 4, 2025	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.
Feb 4, 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
Feb 4, 2025	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	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.
Feb 4, 2025	C · Minimal risk, 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 4, 2025	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.
Jan 16, 2025	▲ 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
Jan 16, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members. · from a complaint
Sep 18, 2024	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. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 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
Mar 7, 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
Jan 24, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Jan 24, 2023	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.
Jan 24, 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 24, 2023	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.
Jan 24, 2023	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.
Jan 24, 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 24, 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.
Jan 24, 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 24, 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 24, 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 24, 2023	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.
Jan 24, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Jan 24, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Jan 24, 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 24, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Mar 5, 2020	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.
Mar 5, 2020	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.
Mar 5, 2020	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.
Mar 5, 2020	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss.
Mar 5, 2020	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 8).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2020	5	0	D
2023	15	0	E
2024	3	0	D
2025	11	1	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.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

5 fines totaling $21,991.

Date	Type	Amount / length
Jan 16, 2025	Fine	$8,278
Nov 20, 2023	Fine	$3,176
Nov 13, 2023	Fine	$2,823
Nov 6, 2023	Fine	$2,470
Oct 17, 2023	Fine	$5,244

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)	3.96	3.80	3.95	top 31% in Connecticut; top 41% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.85	0.70	0.69	top 24% in Connecticut; top 24% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.70	3.43	3.50	top 26% in Connecticut; top 33% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.50	0.46	0.48	top 32% in Connecticut; top 32% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	70.0	37.4	45.8	bottom 2% in Connecticut; bottom 6% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	73.7	38.6	42.9	bottom 3% in Connecticut; bottom 9% 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 3.30, RN 0.71, weekend 3.09. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Blados, Mary Deborah	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	06/16/2021
Innes, Inna	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	06/21/2021
Jankowski, Stanislaw	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2010
Julmisse, Martin	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	10/06/2017
Julmisse, Martin	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	10/06/2017
Julmisse, Martin	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	10/06/2017
Martynski, Martha	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	06/11/2021
Panus, Jadwiga	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2014
Patel, Varsha	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2022
Rudnicki, Doris	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2010
Sirotnak, Mary Catherine	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	10/01/1974
Zebrowski, Stephen	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	06/11/2021

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?"
"If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
"Under what circumstances, if any, would a resident ever be kept in their room or separated from others?"
"When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
"Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
"What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
"Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"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
Jerome Home	1.0 mi	New Britain, CT	★★★★★	4/5
Grandview Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center	1.1 mi	New Britain, CT		—/5	abuseSFF
Apple Rehab Farmington Valley	2.9 mi	Plainville, CT	★★☆☆☆	3/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at New Britain	3.0 mi	New Britain, CT	★★★★★	5/5
Civita Care Center at Newington	3.1 mi	Newington, CT	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Amberwoods of Farmington	3.3 mi	Farmington, CT	★★★☆☆	3/5
Bel-Air Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center	3.4 mi	Newington, CT	★★★☆☆	3/5
Ledgecrest Health Care Center	3.5 mi	Kensington, CT	★★★★☆	4/5
Jefferson House	4.5 mi	Newington, CT	★★★★★	4/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at West Hartford	4.8 mi	West Hartford, CT	★★★☆☆	2/5
Village Green Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center	5.4 mi	Bristol, CT	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Avery Nursing Home/Noble Building	6.2 mi	Hartford, CT	★☆☆☆☆	1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in New Britain →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075374.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Monsignor Bojnowski Manor, INC

50 Pulaski Street, New Britain, CT 06053 · 8602290336

Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 3/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $21,991

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Jan 16, 2025 (F-0689, 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.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
☐ "Under what circumstances, if any, would a resident ever be kept in their room or separated from others?"
☐ "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
☐ "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "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 075374 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)