Connecticut ›Enfield

Parkway Pavilion Health and Rehabilitation Center

1157 Enfield Street, Enfield, CT 06082 · Capitol County · 130 certified beds · avg 121 residents/day · certified since Apr 1, 1976

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.

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.64
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 13, 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: Jul 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (52)

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
Apr 1, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Nov 28, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Jun 13, 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
Apr 8, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Feb 7, 2025D · 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
Feb 7, 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
Nov 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Nov 12, 2024D · 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
Sep 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Sep 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Sep 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Sep 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Sep 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Sep 11, 2024D · 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
Jul 30, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
Jul 30, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Jan 18, 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
Jan 8, 2024D · 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
Jan 8, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 4, 2022D · 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.
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Feb 4, 2022D · 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.
Feb 4, 2022D · 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.
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 8, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 8, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Aug 8, 2019D · 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.
Aug 8, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 8, 2019D · 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.
Aug 8, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Aug 8, 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.
Aug 8, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 23).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
201980E
202280D
2024300F
202551G ▲
202610D

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)3.643.803.95bottom 46% in Connecticut; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.300.700.69bottom 3% in Connecticut; bottom 10% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.403.433.50top 41% in Connecticut; top 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.220.460.48bottom 9% in Connecticut; bottom 15% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)45.337.445.8bottom 18% in Connecticut; bottom 49% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)38.538.642.9top 49% in Connecticut; top 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 3.45, RN 0.29, weekend 3.23. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Partnership

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Dennehy, RaymondIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2016
Kirchick, JoelIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/28/2017
Vera, StevenIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2016
Wachusett Ventures LLCOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/29/2016
Wakefield Capital LLCOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2016
Affainie, UrsulaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/06/2024
Affainie, UrsulaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/09/2025
Antico, JoanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/12/2024
Antico, JoanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/12/2024
Cabot, MelissaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/23/2024
Dennehy, RaymondIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2016
Ellis, SharonIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2019
Ellis, SharonIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2019
Gray, KimberlyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/23/2019
Gray, KimberlyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/23/2019
Lopatosky, JosephIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/28/2017
Lopatosky, JosephIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/28/2017
Medeiros, JeanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/04/2024
Ortiz, EdelmarieIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2022
Shah, DarshanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
St Joseph's Residence1.0 miEnfield, CT★★★★★5/5
Suffield House Rehabilitation and Healthcare Cente1.0 miSuffield, CT★★★★☆4/5
Fresh River Healthcare4.3 miEast Windsor, CT★★★★☆4/5
Touchpoints at Chestnut4.4 miEast Windsor, CT★★★☆☆3/5
Bickford Health Care Center4.5 miWindsor Locks, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Care One at Redstone5.4 miEast Longmeadow, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Julian J Levitt Family Nursing Home5.7 miLongmeadow, MA★★★★☆3/5
East Longmeadow Skilled Nursing Center5.9 miEast Longmeadow, MA★★★★☆4/5
Agawam East Rehab and Nursing6.5 miAgawam, MA★★★★★4/5
Chestnut Hill Health and Rehabilitation Center LLC6.6 miEast Longmeadow, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Agawam North Rehab and Nursing6.7 miAgawam, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Agawam West Rehab and Nursing6.8 miAgawam, MA★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Enfield →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075195.