Mystic Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center, LLC
475 High St, Mystic, CT 06355 · Southeastern Ct County · 100 certified beds · avg 90 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1976
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: RYDERS HEALTH MANAGEMENT (7 facilities, chain avg rating 1.7★)
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.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 19, 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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Apr 30, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 6, 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: Apr 27, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 17, 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: May 29, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (41)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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 |
| May 6, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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 |
| May 6, 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 19, 2026 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Mar 19, 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 19, 2026 | D · Potential for 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 |
| Jan 14, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Jan 14, 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. |
| Jan 14, 2026 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 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. |
| Jan 14, 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. |
| Jan 14, 2026 | 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 14, 2026 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2026 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2026 | 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 14, 2026 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. |
| Nov 25, 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 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | 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 17, 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 |
| Apr 17, 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 17, 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 14, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Feb 14, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 14, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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 |
| Feb 14, 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 |
| Feb 14, 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 8, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Nov 8, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
| Nov 8, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, 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. |
| Oct 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 2, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Aug 2, 2021 | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 11).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 18 | 2 | J ▲ |
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)
2 fines totaling $38,860.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 2026 | Fine | $17,215 |
| Mar 19, 2026 | Fine | $21,645 |
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) | 3.65 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 47% in Connecticut; bottom 44% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.61 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 50% in Connecticut; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.39 | 3.43 | 3.50 | top 44% in Connecticut; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.38 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 46% in Connecticut; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 58.8 | 37.4 | 45.8 | bottom 5% in Connecticut; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 64.7 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 8% in Connecticut; bottom 16% 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 3.35, RN 0.56, weekend 3.11. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kopchik, Kenneth | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 06/30/2006 |
| Sbriglio, Martin | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 06/30/2006 |
| Sbriglio, Martin | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2006 |
| Sbriglio, Martin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2006 |
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 someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "How soon after admission is a full assessment completed, and how are the findings shared with the family?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "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 monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple Rehab Mystic | 0.9 mi | Mystic, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Pendleton Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 1.3 mi | Mystic, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Avalon Health Care Center at Stoneridge | 1.5 mi | Mystic, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Complete Care at Groton Regency | 3.7 mi | Groton, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Fairview | 5.6 mi | Groton, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Beechwood Health & Rehabilitation Center | 6.8 mi | New London, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Harbor Village North Health and Rehabilitation Cen | 7.0 mi | New London, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Royal of Westerly Nursing Center | 7.5 mi | Westerly, RI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Westerly Health Center | 8.0 mi | Westerly, RI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| New London Sub-Acute and Nursing | 8.1 mi | Waterford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Greentree Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 9.1 mi | Waterford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Apple Rehab Clipper | 10.0 mi | Westerly, RI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075271.