How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Mount Holly Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center
62 Richmond Avenue, Lumberton, NJ 08048 (opens Google Maps) · Burlington County · (609) 914-8800· 180 certified beds · avg 161 residents/day · certified since Jun 16, 1971 · 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 →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES (87 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
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)
inspected Feb 7, 2025
5
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 7, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.63
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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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 · May 20, 2023 · F-0808
The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 20, 2023 · F-0808
The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows.
Why it matters: A special diet handled without proper medical oversight may not be safe or right for the resident's condition.
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: Jun 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 7, 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 7, 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: Mar 25, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 7, 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 7, 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): 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: Mar 25, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 20, 2023 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 20, 2023 · F-0689
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): 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: Jun 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 20, 2023 · F-0725
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 20, 2023 · F-0725
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.
Why it matters: Understaffing means longer waits for help, missed care, and higher risk of falls and other 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: Jun 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 F-0600
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 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
View all 32 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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 · F-0600 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Feb 7, 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 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0558 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| May 20, 2023 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| May 20, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| May 20, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0554 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0580 |
| May 20, 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. · F-0609 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0644 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0657 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| May 20, 2023 | 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 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| May 20, 2023 | 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 |
| May 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| May 12, 2021 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (14 → 14).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2025
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 2
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 1 | 0 | B |
| 2023 | 14 | 3 | J ▲ |
| 2025 | 17 | 2 | G ▲ |
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: 3.63
New Jersey average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.38
New Jersey average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.39
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) | 3.63 | 3.88 | 3.95 | bottom 48% in New Jersey; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.38 | 0.67 | 0.69 | bottom 19% in New Jersey; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.39 | 3.53 | 3.50 | top 46% in New Jersey; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.19 | 0.50 | 0.48 | bottom 11% in New Jersey; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 44.9 | 39.7 | 45.8 | bottom 32% in New Jersey; top 50% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 35.3 | 37.7 | 42.9 | top 46% in New Jersey; top 39% 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 3.43, RN 0.36, weekend 3.20.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.43 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Mount Holly Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center. 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 - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bauer, Gary | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Bauer, Gary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Bollampally, Soumya | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Bollampally, Soumya | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Dallos, Timothy | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Dallos, Timothy | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Dallos, Timothy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Dallos, Timothy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Harman, Dina | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Harman, Dina | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2025 |
| Mount Holly Real Property LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| NFR 2020 Irrv Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Nutraco LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/12/2024 |
| Nutraco LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2025 |
| Posen, Mindee | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Posen, Mindee | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Quinto Nexgen LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2022 |
Showing 20 of 31 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 11 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 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.
- 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
- Exton Post Acute — Exton, PA · overall 3/5
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.
- "Who oversees residents' therapeutic diets, and how do the doctor and dietitian work together on them?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Is signing an arbitration agreement required for admission, and can we refuse it without affecting my family member's care?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 45% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 31 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 96 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complete Care at Marcella | 4.7 mi | Burlington, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Complete Care at Burlington Woods, LLC | 5.1 mi | Burlington, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Masonic Village at Burlington | 5.5 mi | Burlington, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Aspen Hills Healthcare Center | 6.5 mi | Pemberton, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Total Rehab Moorestown | 6.5 mi | Moorestown, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Cambridge Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 7.3 mi | Moorestown, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Careone at Moorestown | 7.3 mi | Moorestown, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Willowbrooke Court Skilled Care at Evergreens | 7.7 mi | Moorestown, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Medford Leas | 8.6 mi | Medford, NJ | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Wiley Mission | 9.0 mi | Marlton, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bristol Health & Rehab Center | 9.1 mi | Bristol, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Pines at Medford | 9.4 mi | Medford, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Burlington, NJ — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Palace Rehabilitation and Care Center, the — Maple Shade, NJ · overall 1/5
- Riverview Estates Rehab and Senior Living Center — Riverton, NJ · overall 4/5
- Wynwood Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Cinnaminson, NJ · overall 2/5
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 315128.