Connecticut ›Salisbury

Noble Horizons

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

17 Cobble Rd, Salisbury, CT 06068 (opens Google Maps) · Nw Hills County · (860) 435-9851· 91 certified beds · avg 61 residents/day · certified since Jan 3, 1975 · 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 →

SFF Candidate

What Special Focus status means →

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 27, 2026
5
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 27, 2026
$151,542
Fines, last 3 years
4.14
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, pattern · Feb 27, 2026 · F-0880

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.

Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 10, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 27, 2026 · 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: Apr 10, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 9, 2024 · 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: Aug 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 24, 2024 · 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: Jun 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 20, 2021 · 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: Nov 30, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 51 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    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. · from a complaint F-0550

  2. 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. · from a complaint F-0609

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal 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

View all 51 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
Apr 23, 2026D · 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
Apr 23, 2026D · 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
Apr 23, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Apr 23, 2026D · 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
Feb 27, 2026▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Feb 27, 2026▲ G · Actual 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
Feb 27, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628
Feb 27, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0636
Feb 27, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638
Feb 27, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640
Feb 27, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Feb 27, 2026E · 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
Feb 27, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Feb 27, 2026D · 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
Feb 27, 2026D · 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
Feb 27, 2026D · 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
Feb 27, 2026D · 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. · F-0610
Feb 27, 2026D · 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
Feb 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. · F-0658
Feb 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Feb 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
Feb 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881
Feb 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Jul 9, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 24, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 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. · from a complaint · F-0657
Mar 21, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Mar 21, 2024E · 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 21, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838
Mar 21, 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. · F-0550
Mar 21, 2024D · 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
Mar 21, 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. · F-0580
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640
Mar 21, 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. · F-0656
Mar 21, 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
Mar 21, 2024D · 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. · F-0658
Mar 21, 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. · F-0686
Mar 21, 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
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2024D · 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. · F-0760
Mar 21, 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. · F-0842
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0868
Mar 21, 2024D · 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
Mar 21, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
Oct 20, 2021▲ G · Actual 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
Oct 20, 2021E · 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
Oct 20, 2021D · 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 (22 → 19).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 25
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2026
All citations: 23
Serious citations (G–L): 2

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202131G ▲
2024252G ▲
2026232K ▲

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 →

3 fines totaling $151,542, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

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
Feb 27, 2026Fine$126,965
Feb 27, 2026Payment Denial8 days from May 27, 2026
Jul 9, 2024Fine$14,050
Mar 21, 2024Fine$10,527

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: 4.14
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.10
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.78
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)4.143.803.95top 28% in Connecticut; top 34% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.100.700.69top 12% in Connecticut; top 12% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.783.433.50top 23% in Connecticut; top 30% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.670.460.48top 16% in Connecticut; top 18% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)35.537.445.8top 48% in Connecticut; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)20.038.642.9top 17% in Connecticut; top 13% 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 3.74, RN 0.99, weekend 3.41.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.74 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Noble Horizons. 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 →

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Anquillare, JosephIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2024
Baldoni, DoreenIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Canuel, DavidIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Fidanza, JamesIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/30/2024
Gilland, PatrickIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/19/2001
Golas, MargaretIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Large, MercedeseIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Latina, MichaelIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/16/2024
Latina, MichaelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/16/2024
Martinez, CynthiaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
McGovern, KennethIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Moore, P WayneIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Oh, Jong GilIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Oh, Jong GilIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Pond, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2018
Pond, WilliamIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2018
Pond, WilliamIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2018
Shahen, CynthiaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Thompson, WilliamIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Thompson, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022

Showing 20 of 21 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 1 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

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.

  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "How soon after admission is a full assessment completed, and how are the findings shared with the family?"
  • "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"

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 36% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 21 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "CMS lists this facility under its Special Focus program — what is being done differently, and by when?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Geer Nursing and Rehabilitation4.7 miCanaan, CT★★★★★4/5
Sharon Center for Health & Rehabilitation8.3 miSharon, CT★★★★☆3/5
Timberlyn Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation13.4 miGreat Barrington, MA★★★★☆4/5
Fairview Commons Nursing & Rehabilitation Center15.7 miGreat Barrington, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Berkshire Rehabilitation & Skilled Care Center17.1 miSandisfield, MA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Havencare at Litchfield Woods19.1 miTorrington, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Wolcott Hall Nursing Center, INC19.5 miTorrington, CT★★☆☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Nw Hills, CT — 9 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 Salisbury →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075236.

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