How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Preferred Care at Old Bridge, LLC
6989 Rt18, Old Bridge, NJ 08857 (opens Google Maps) · Middlesex County · (732) 360-2277· 140 certified beds · avg 134 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1993 · 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: PREFERRED CARE (13 facilities, chain avg rating 3.7★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 31, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 6, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.44
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 · Mar 6, 2023 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 6, 2023 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Mar 31, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 11, 2021 · F-0697
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 11, 2021 · F-0697
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
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: Mar 24, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 15 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint F-0558
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
View all 15 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 23, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint · F-0558 |
| Jul 10, 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 |
| Jul 10, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 6, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Mar 6, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · F-0710 |
| Mar 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 6, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Mar 11, 2021 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Mar 11, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 11, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0688 |
| Mar 11, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 11, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 1).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2023
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 5
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 5 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2023 | 5 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | E |
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 facilityNew Jersey averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.44
New Jersey average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.40
New Jersey average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.22
New Jersey average: 3.53
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New Jersey avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.44 | 3.88 | 3.95 | bottom 35% in New Jersey; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.40 | 0.67 | 0.69 | bottom 21% in New Jersey; bottom 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.22 | 3.53 | 3.50 | bottom 43% in New Jersey; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.50 | 0.48 | bottom 36% in New Jersey; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.4 | 39.7 | 45.8 | bottom 27% in New Jersey; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 37.7 | 42.9 | bottom 26% in New Jersey; bottom 39% 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 3.66, RN 0.42, weekend 3.41.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.66 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 5/5 · 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 Preferred Care at Old Bridge, LLC. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Green, Dov | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/04/2017 |
| Mermelstein, Boruch | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/04/2017 |
| Ob Investor LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/04/2017 |
| Preferred Care at Old Bridge LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/04/2017 |
| Schnell, David | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/04/2017 |
| Beck, Menachem | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/19/2017 |
| Stern, Samuel | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/04/2017 |
All 7 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Preferred Care — 13 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.
- Preferred Care at Wall — Allenwood, NJ · overall 5/5
- Total Rehab Moorestown — Moorestown, NJ · overall 3/5
- Adira Nursing and Rehabilitation — Saginaw, MI · overall 2/5
- Avista Nursing and Rehabilitation — Saginaw, MI · overall 3/5
- Briarwood Nursing and Rehabilitation — Flint, MI · overall 3/5
- Carriage House Nursing and Rehabilitation — Bay City, MI · overall 2/5
- Hampton Nursing and Rehabilitation — Bay City, MI · overall 4/5
- Marvin & Betty Danto Health Care Center — West Bloomfield, MI · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 12 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.
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Who would be my family member's attending doctor here, and how often would they be seen?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the New Jersey 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 47% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 87 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reformed Church Home | 1.1 mi | Old Bridge, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Old Bridge | 1.8 mi | Old Bridge, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Roosevelt Care Center at Old Bridge | 2.4 mi | Old Bridge, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Complete Care at Madison, LLC | 4.2 mi | Matawan, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Meadowbrook Respiratory and Nursing Center | 4.6 mi | Matawan, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Careone at East Brunswick | 5.1 mi | East Brunswick, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Excel Care at Manalapan | 6.0 mi | Manalapan, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Venetian Care & Rehabilitation Center, LLC | 6.1 mi | South Amboy, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Careone at Holmdel | 6.8 mi | Holmdel, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Complete Care at Bayshore LLC | 6.9 mi | Holmdel, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Village Point | 7.0 mi | Monroe Township, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Anchor Care and Rehabilitation Center | 7.2 mi | Hazlet, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Middlesex, NJ — 25 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Roosevelt Care Center — Edison, NJ · overall 5/5
- Rose Mountain Care Center — New Brunswick, NJ · overall 4/5
- Spring Creek Healthcare Center — Perth Amboy, NJ · overall 4/5
- St Joseph's Home Al & NC, INC — Woodbridge, NJ · overall 5/5
- The Elms Rehab and Healthcare Center of Cranbury — Cranbury, NJ · overall 2/5
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 315321.