Sapphire Nursing at Meadow Hill
172 Meadow Hill Road, Newburgh, NY 12550 · Orange County · 190 certified beds · avg 184 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1976
Part of chain: SAPPHIRE CARE GROUP (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5
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 · Dec 7, 2022 · F-0686
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.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
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: Dec 29, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (30)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| May 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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 |
| Dec 7, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| May 2, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 2, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 2, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. |
| May 2, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| May 2, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 2, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 2, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| May 2, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 2, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| May 2, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 7).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 8 | 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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | New York avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 2.93 | 3.58 | 3.95 | bottom 21% in New York; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.39 | 0.68 | 0.69 | bottom 12% in New York; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.54 | 3.13 | 3.50 | bottom 18% in New York; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.30 | 0.48 | 0.48 | bottom 38% in New York; bottom 31% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 25.2 | 40.3 | 45.8 | top 14% in New York; top 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.9 | 39.8 | 42.9 | top 22% in New York; top 23% 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 3.38, RN 0.45, weekend 2.93. 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abramczyk, Machla | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 20% | 09/01/2017 |
| Farkowitz, Esther | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 33% | 09/01/2017 |
| Platschek, Richard | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 33% | 09/01/2017 |
| Schuck, Robert | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 13% | 09/01/2017 |
| Platschek, Richard | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2017 |
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 prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "How do you handle COVID-19 vaccination for residents and staff, and what happens during an outbreak?"
- "What specific training do your nurse aides complete in dementia care and abuse prevention, and how often is it refreshed?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fishkill Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing | 5.4 mi | Beacon, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Taconic Rehabilitation and Nursing at Beacon | 6.3 mi | Beacon, NY | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Montgomery Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 8.5 mi | Montgomery, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sapphire Nursing at Wappingers | 10.1 mi | Wappingers Falls, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Taconic Rehabilitation and Nursing at Hopewell | 10.1 mi | Fishkill, NY | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Campbell Hall Rehabilitation Center INC | 11.5 mi | Campbell Hall, NY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Hudson Valley Rehabilitation & Extended Care Ctr | 13.6 mi | Highland, NY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Taconic Rehabilitation and Nursing at Ulster | 14.0 mi | Highland, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Pines at Poughkeepsie Ctr for Nursing & Rehab | 14.3 mi | Poughkeepsie, NY | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| New Paltz Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing | 14.3 mi | New Paltz, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Grand Rehabilitation and Nrsg at River Valley | 14.7 mi | Poughkeepsie, NY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Glen Arden INC | 15.4 mi | Goshen, NY | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 335464.