Connecticut ›North Haven

Montowese Center for Health & Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

163 Quinnipiac Avenue, North Haven, CT 06473 (opens Google Maps) · South Central Ct County · (203) 624-3303· 120 certified beds · avg 111 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: NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES (42 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Oct 24, 2024
3
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 15, 2025
$10,033
Fines, last 3 years
3.71
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Aug 16, 2022 · F-0760

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.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Aug 16, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 15, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

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: Jan 14, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 16, 2022 · F-0684

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

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: Sep 16, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 77 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

View all 77 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jan 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 22, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 5, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 15, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0600
Dec 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · F-0711
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 · F-0880
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · from a complaint · F-0882
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919
Oct 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0657
Oct 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Sep 30, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0550
Sep 30, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0600
Jun 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
May 23, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
May 23, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 · F-0760
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · from a complaint · F-0554
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · from a complaint · F-0577
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · from a complaint · F-0624
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · from a complaint · F-0635
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0636
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · from a complaint · F-0770
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep complete, dated laboratory records in residents' files. · from a complaint · F-0775
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them. · from a complaint · F-0776
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · from a complaint · F-0806
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Dec 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 7, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0760
Nov 13, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 13, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · from a complaint · F-0694
Oct 24, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 16, 2022▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Aug 16, 2022▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Aug 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Aug 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have an agreement with an approved laboratory to provide lab services, even though it doesn't offer lab services on site. · F-0772
Aug 16, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0657
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 16, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility was not properly licensed, or did not operate in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and accepted professional standards. · F-0836
Mar 6, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0585
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0600
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Mar 6, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (13 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2023
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 40
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2020150E
2022132J ▲
202350D
2024400E
202531G ▲
202610D

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $10,033.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Dec 23, 2024Fine$10,033

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.71
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.48
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.27
Connecticut average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityConnecticut avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.713.803.95top 47% in Connecticut; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.480.700.69bottom 30% in Connecticut; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.273.433.50bottom 44% in Connecticut; bottom 45% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.230.460.48bottom 11% in Connecticut; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)41.337.445.8bottom 32% in Connecticut; top 40% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)55.638.642.9bottom 19% in Connecticut; bottom 28% 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 3.83, RN 0.50, weekend 3.38.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.83 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 Montowese Center for Health & 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.

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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Ehrenfeld, MindyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Gilmartin, ThomasIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Ilana Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Juniper Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Mydert Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest51%06/07/2024
Oak Management Capital LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Ysro TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Zadun Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest49%06/07/2024
Baker Tilly Advisory Group LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2024
David Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Gabriel, JoanneIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Gilmartin, ThomasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Ilana Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/13/2024
Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/13/2024
Michelle Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
National Health Care Associates INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2024
National Health Care Associates INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2024
Ostreicher, MarcIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2024

Showing 20 of 24 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 4 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

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.

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

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
  • "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
  • "How often does each resident's doctor visit and review their care in person?"

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 41% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 24 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 58 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Leeway, INC2.3 miNew Haven, CT★★★★☆5/5
New Haven Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC2.8 miNew Haven, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Mary Wade Home2.8 miNew Haven, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Whitney Center3.0 miHamden, CT★★★☆☆3/5
Arden Care Center3.6 miHamden, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Apple Rehab Laurel Woods3.8 miEast Haven, CT★★☆☆☆2/5
Whitney Rehabilitation Care Center3.9 miHamden, CT★★★☆☆3/5
Hamden Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center4.3 miHamden, CT★★★☆☆4/5
Grimes Center4.7 miNew Haven, CT★★★★★4/5
Advanced Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation5.0 miNew Haven, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Ark Healthcare & Rehabilitation at Branford Hills5.8 miBranford, CT★★☆☆☆2/5
Whispering Pines Rehabilitation and Nursing Center5.8 miEast Haven, CT★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in South Central Ct, CT — 23 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.

All facilities in North Haven →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075017.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details