How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Rose Mountain Care Center
Route 1 & 18, New Brunswick, NJ 08901 (opens Google Maps) · Middlesex County · (732) 828-2400· 112 certified beds · avg 93 residents/day · certified since Dec 1, 1997 · 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: THE ROSENBERG FAMILY (16 facilities, chain avg rating 2.7★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 29, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.58
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 36 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The 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. F-0676
The 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. F-0690
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
View all 36 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0676 |
| May 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0690 |
| May 29, 2026 | 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 |
| May 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0880 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials. · F-0680 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. · F-0712 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · F-0880 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 12, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | 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 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | 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 12, 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · F-0557 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 · F-0585 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give all staff the required training on its quality improvement program — the internal system for finding problems and making care better. · F-0944 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0676 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide its staff with required training on behavioral health — caring for residents with conditions like dementia, depression, or other mental health needs. · F-0949 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 4).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 4
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 20 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 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.
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: 4.58
New Jersey average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.66
New Jersey average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.34
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) | 4.58 | 3.88 | 3.95 | top 14% in New Jersey; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.66 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 37% in New Jersey; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.34 | 3.53 | 3.50 | top 13% in New Jersey; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.48 | top 40% in New Jersey; top 38% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 25.3 | 39.7 | 45.8 | top 14% in New Jersey; top 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 16.7 | 37.7 | 42.9 | top 10% in New Jersey; top 9% 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 3.72, RN 0.53, weekend 3.52.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.72 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Rose Mountain Care Center. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rosenberg, Esther | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 08/01/1988 |
| Rosenberg, Jonathan | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 08/01/1988 |
| Abboud, Walid | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/08/2025 |
| Abboud, Walid | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/08/2025 |
| Pollak, Solomon | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/08/2025 |
| Pollak, Solomon | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/08/2025 |
| Rose Mountain Associates | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1988 |
| Rose Mountain Associates | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1988 |
| Rosenberg, Esther | Individual | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/1988 |
| Rosenberg, Esther | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/1988 |
| Rosenberg, Jonathan | Individual | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/1988 |
| Rosenberg, Jonathan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/1988 |
| Stern, Samuel | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Stern, Samuel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
All 14 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 The Rosenberg Family — 16 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.
- Runnells Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare — Berkeley Heights, NJ · overall 2/5
- Shore Pointe Care Center — Eatontown, NJ · overall 1/5
- Daughters of Miriam Center for Nursing & Rehabilit — Beachwood, OH · overall 2/5
- King David Post Acute Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC — Beachwood, OH · overall 3/5abuse
- Ivy Hill Post Acute Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC — Philadelphia, PA · overall 3/5
- St John Neumann Ctr for Rehab & Healthcare — Philadelphia, PA · overall 2/5
- St Monica Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare — Philadelphia, PA · overall 2/5
- Stroudsburg Post Acute Nursing & Rehabilitationllc — Stroudsburg, PA · overall 2/5abuse
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 15 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 help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
- "Who runs your activities program, what are their qualifications, and can I see this week's activity calendar?"
- "How often does the attending doctor physically see each resident, and how is that documented?"
- "Is signing an arbitration agreement required for admission, and can we refuse it without affecting my family member's care?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 25% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 14 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 87 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Embassy Manor at Edison Nursing and Rehabilitation | 3.2 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Parker at Somerset, INC | 3.7 mi | Somerset, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Accelerate Skilled Nursing and Rehab Piscataway | 3.7 mi | Piscataway, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Regency Heritage Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 3.8 mi | Somerset, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Aristacare at Cedar Oaks | 4.5 mi | South Plainfield, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Somerset Woods Rehabilitation & Nursing Center | 5.6 mi | Somerset, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Careone at East Brunswick | 5.6 mi | East Brunswick, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Hartwyck at Oak Tree | 7.2 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Old Bridge | 7.2 mi | Old Bridge, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Roosevelt Care Center | 7.3 mi | Edison, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Careone at Somerset Valley | 7.5 mi | Bound Brook, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| New Jersey Veterans Memorial Home Menlo | 7.5 mi | Edison, 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.
- 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
- Venetian Care & Rehabilitation Center, LLC — South Amboy, NJ · overall 2/5
- Village Point — Monroe Township, NJ · overall 3/5
- Alameda Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare — Perth Amboy, NJ · overall 4/5
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 315384.