How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Pendleton Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
44 Maritime Drive, Mystic, CT 06355 (opens Google Maps) · Southeastern Ct County · (860) 572-1700· 120 certified beds · avg 116 residents/day · certified since Feb 20, 1991 · 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 →
Part of chain: ATLAS HEALTHCARE (29 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 23, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 12, 2019
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.46
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 12, 2019 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 12, 2019 · 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: Jan 23, 2020 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint F-0842
The 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 F-0658
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. F-0580
View all 32 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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Aug 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0658 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0580 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0657 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Sep 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0684 |
| May 14, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0761 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | 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. · F-0550 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0561 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0656 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0677 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0758 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Dec 1, 2022 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The 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 |
| Dec 12, 2019 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Dec 12, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2022
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2022 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | D |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.46
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.67
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.09
Connecticut average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Connecticut avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.46 | 3.80 | 3.95 | bottom 37% in Connecticut; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.67 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 40% in Connecticut; top 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.09 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 31% in Connecticut; bottom 36% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.35 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 42% in Connecticut; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 33.7 | 37.4 | 45.8 | top 37% in Connecticut; top 21% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 12.5 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 8% in Connecticut; top 6% 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 3.75, RN 0.72, weekend 3.35.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.75 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Pendleton Rehabilitation and Nursing Center. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ct-2 Operations Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/01/2022 |
| Gottlieb, Moshe | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| JMH Family LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2022 |
| JMH Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2022 |
| MLS Family LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2022 |
| MLS Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2022 |
| SGS Family LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2022 |
| SGS Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 09/01/2022 |
| 44 Maritime Drive Realty LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/03/2025 |
| Bak, Pinchos | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Bak, Pinchos | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Bak, Pinchos | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Ct-2 Opco Manager LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Ct-2 Opco Manager LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/04/2025 |
| Goldberger, Shlomo | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Goldberger, Shlomo | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Gottlieb, Moshe | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Gottlieb, Moshe | Individual | Limited Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Gottlieb, Moshe | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Hennessey, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
Showing 20 of 44 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 24 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Atlas Healthcare — 29 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Suffield House Rehabilitation and Healthcare Cente — Suffield, CT · overall 4/5
- Vernon Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Vernon, CT · overall 5/5
- Village Green Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Bristol, CT · overall 2/5
- Hathorne Hill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Danvers, MA · overall 4/5
- Haverhill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Haverhill, MA · overall 2/5
- Masconomet Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Topsfield, MA · overall 3/5
- Nemasket Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Middleborough, MA · overall 3/5
- Oak Knoll Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Framingham, MA · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 28 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
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?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Connecticut midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 34% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 44 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 16 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avalon Health Care Center at Stoneridge | 0.3 mi | Mystic, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Mystic Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center, LLC | 1.3 mi | Mystic, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Apple Rehab Mystic | 1.4 mi | Mystic, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Groton Regency | 5.0 mi | Groton, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Royal of Westerly Nursing Center | 6.4 mi | Westerly, RI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Westerly Health Center | 6.8 mi | Westerly, RI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fairview | 6.8 mi | Groton, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Beechwood Health & Rehabilitation Center | 8.0 mi | New London, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Harbor Village North Health and Rehabilitation Cen | 8.3 mi | New London, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Apple Rehab Clipper | 8.9 mi | Westerly, RI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| New London Sub-Acute and Nursing | 9.3 mi | Waterford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Greentree Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 10.1 mi | Waterford, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Southeastern Ct, CT — 14 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Apple Rehab Uncasville — Uncasville, CT · overall 2/5
- Bride Brook Rehabilitation & Nursing Center — Niantic, CT · overall 5/5
- Civita Care Bayview — Waterford, CT · overall 1/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075341.