DelawareNewark

Newark Manor Nursing Home

254 West Main Street, Newark, DE 19711 · New Castle County · 67 certified beds · avg 56 residents/day · certified since Aug 31, 2009

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.19
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.

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 · Oct 24, 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: Nov 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 19, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: May 28, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

All citations in the current public record (26)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Oct 24, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Oct 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Oct 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them. · from a complaint
Feb 19, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.
Dec 21, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 21, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 21, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Dec 21, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Jul 1, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jul 1, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jul 1, 2019C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 3).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2019100E
202140E
202430D
202592G ▲

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

MeasureThis facilityDelaware avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.194.673.95top 16% in Delaware; top 11% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.121.040.69top 33% in Delaware; top 12% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.534.183.50top 19% in Delaware; top 12% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.610.640.48top 44% in Delaware; top 22% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)32.841.345.8top 22% in Delaware; top 19% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)28.641.242.9top 20% in Delaware; top 26% 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 4.27, RN 0.92, weekend 3.73. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Individual

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ownership Data Not Available

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Encore at Parkside2.2 miNewark, DE★★☆☆☆1/5SFF
Exceptional Care for Children2.3 miNewark, DE★★★★★5/5
Jeanne Jugan Residence3.8 miNewark, DE★★★★★4/5
Pike Creek Nursing & Rehabilitation Center5.4 miWilmington, DE★★☆☆☆1/5SFF
Excelcare at Newark LLC5.4 miNewark, DE★★☆☆☆1/5
Cadia Rehabilitation Pike Creek5.9 miWilmington, DE★★★★☆3/5
Laurelwood Healthcare Center6.3 miElkton, MD★★★☆☆2/5
Complete Care at Brackenville LLC6.5 miHockessin, DE★★★★☆3/5
Elkton Nursing and Rehabilitation Center7.2 miElkton, MD★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
New Castle Health and Rehabilitation Center7.7 miNew Castle, DE★★☆☆☆1/5SFF

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Newark →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 08A020.