Connecticut ›Hartford

Parkville Care Center

5 Greenwood Street, Hartford, CT 06106 · Capitol County · 145 certified beds · avg 139 residents/day · certified since Mar 31, 1974

Part of chain: ICARE HEALTH NETWORK (12 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.30
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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.

All citations in the current public record (36)

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
Jul 1, 2026D · 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
Jun 1, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
Apr 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Apr 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Apr 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have policies on smoking.
Apr 11, 2025C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Apr 11, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts.
Apr 11, 2025B · Minimal risk, 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 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 3, 2024D · 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
Apr 3, 2024D · 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
Jun 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jun 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Jun 27, 2023D · 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.
Jun 27, 2023D · 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.
Jun 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Jun 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jun 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 27, 2023D · 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.
Jun 24, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jun 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Jun 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit.
Jun 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2021D · 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.
Jun 24, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents.
Jun 24, 2021C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 11).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202190E
202390E
202450D
2025110E
202620D

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 facilityConnecticut avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.303.803.95bottom 21% in Connecticut; bottom 26% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.330.700.69bottom 4% in Connecticut; bottom 13% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.933.433.50bottom 16% in Connecticut; bottom 27% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.210.460.48bottom 6% in Connecticut; bottom 13% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)30.837.445.8top 26% in Connecticut; top 16% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.338.642.9top 36% in Connecticut; top 33% 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 3.02, RN 0.30, weekend 2.68. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Creative Investment LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest45%01/25/2019
Krausz, BatshevaIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest45%01/25/2019
Silver Investment LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest45%01/25/2019
Landi, MichaelIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE01/25/2019
Wright, ChristopherIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/25/2019

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
Trinity Hill Care Center0.8 miHartford, CT★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Chelsea Place Care Center LLC0.9 miHartford, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Avery Nursing Home/Noble Building1.5 miHartford, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5
West Hartford Health & Rehabilitation Center1.7 miWest Hartford, CT★★★★★4/5
Saint Mary Home2.2 miWest Hartford, CT★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Hebrew Center for Health and Rehabilitation2.9 miWest Hartford, CT★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Riverside Health & Rehabilitation Center3.5 miEast Hartford, CT★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Autumn Lake Healthcare at West Hartford3.5 miWest Hartford, CT★★★☆☆2/5
Jefferson House4.1 miNewington, CT★★★★★4/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at New Britain4.3 miNew Britain, CT★★★★★5/5
Bloomfield Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation4.7 miBloomfield, CT★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Amberwoods of Farmington4.7 miFarmington, CT★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Hartford →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075250.