52 Missionary Rd, Cromwell, CT 06416 (opens Google Maps) · Capitol County · (860) 635-5511· 60 certified beds · avg 54 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1987 · 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: COVENANT LIVING (15 facilities, chain avg rating 4.4★)
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 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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 23, 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: May 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The 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 F-0610
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2025 | 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 |
| May 1, 2025 | 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 |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0610 |
| May 1, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| May 24, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Apr 23, 2024 | ▲ 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Apr 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Apr 23, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 23, 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 |
| Apr 23, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0695 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | 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. · F-0609 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The 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 7, 2019 | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 6).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2020 | 4 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 7 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 4 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $12,048.
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.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2024 | Fine | $12,048 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.59 | 3.80 | 3.95 | top 16% in Connecticut; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.00 | 0.70 | 0.69 | top 16% in Connecticut; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.26 | 3.43 | 3.50 | top 13% in Connecticut; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.64 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 18% in Connecticut; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 37.7 | 37.4 | 45.8 | bottom 46% in Connecticut; top 30% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 23.1 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 23% in Connecticut; top 18% 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 3.94, RN 0.86, weekend 3.66.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.94 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Pilgrim Manor. 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.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Covenant Living Communities & Services | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/03/2014 |
| Aagaard, Jon | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Christensen, Pamela | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Covenant Living Communities & Services | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2014 |
| Cunliffe, Terri | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/19/2009 |
| Cunliffe, Terri | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/19/2009 |
| Eastburg, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Erickson, David | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/31/2008 |
| Espinosa, Marc | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Hodgkinson, Donald | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Holt, Jody | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2017 |
| Holt, Jody | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2017 |
| Holt, Jody | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Manlove, Matt | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2017 |
| Oxendale, Roger | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2017 |
| Stante, Marlene | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Vining, Anne | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
All 17 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Covenant Living — 15 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 14 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Cromwell | 0.6 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Portland Care & Rehab Centre, INC | 1.9 mi | Portland, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Cromwell | 2.8 mi | Cromwell, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Water's Edge Center for Health & Rehabilitation | 3.2 mi | Middletown, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Wadsworth Glen Health Care and Rehabilitation Cent | 3.4 mi | Middletown, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| John L. Levitow Health Care Center | 3.6 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| 60 West | 3.8 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Middletown | 4.4 mi | Middletown, CT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Apple Rehab Rocky Hill | 4.5 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Maple View Health & Rehabilitation Center | 5.1 mi | Rocky Hill, CT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Cobalt Lodge Health Care and Rehabilitation Center | 6.1 mi | Cobalt, CT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Ledgecrest Health Care Center | 6.1 mi | Kensington, CT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Capitol, CT — 65 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.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075306.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details