Mountain View Center Genesis Healthcare
9 Haywood Avenue, Rutland, VT 05701 · Rutland County · 158 certified beds · avg 131 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1970
Part of chain: GENESIS HEALTHCARE (184 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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 · Apr 8, 2026 · 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: May 15, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 8, 2026 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.
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: May 15, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 9, 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: Oct 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 5, 2023 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: May 10, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (31)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 3, 2026 | 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. |
| Jun 3, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. |
| Jun 3, 2026 | 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. |
| Jun 3, 2026 | 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. |
| Apr 8, 2026 | ▲ 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 |
| Apr 8, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The 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 |
| Sep 9, 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 |
| Jun 4, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint |
| Apr 11, 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 |
| Apr 11, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jan 31, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · from a complaint |
| Sep 18, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 5, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Apr 5, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 4).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 9 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 2 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 6 | 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)
3 fines totaling $40,350.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 2026 | Fine | $13,065 |
| Apr 8, 2026 | Fine | $17,665 |
| Sep 9, 2025 | Fine | $9,620 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Vermont avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.61 | 4.34 | 3.95 | bottom 16% in Vermont; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.61 | 0.82 | 0.69 | bottom 26% in Vermont; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.26 | 3.76 | 3.50 | bottom 19% in Vermont; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.45 | 0.52 | 0.48 | bottom 42% in Vermont; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 53.6 | 55.4 | 45.8 | top 32% in Vermont; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 44.8 | 39.9 | 42.9 | bottom 39% in Vermont; bottom 44% 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 3.73, RN 0.63, weekend 3.36. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fc-Gen Operations Investment LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Gen Operations I LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Gen Operations II LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Genesis Healthcare INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Genesis Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Genesis Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Genesis Operations LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 03/01/2009 |
| Genesis VT Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 03/01/2009 |
| GHC Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2011 |
| Sun Healthcare Group INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Whitman, Arnold | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/02/2015 |
| Berg, Michael | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/02/2015 |
| Isabelle, Teresa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/21/2019 |
| Isabelle, Teresa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/31/2025 |
| Sobel, Eitan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2020 |
| Sobel, Eitan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/31/2025 |
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?"
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Pines at Rutland Center for Nursing & Rehabili | 0.3 mi | Rutland, VT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Rutland Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center | 1.4 mi | Rutland, VT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Gill Odd Fellows Home of Vermont | 19.0 mi | Ludlow, VT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 475012.