How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
256 County House Road, Clarksboro, NJ 08020 (opens Google Maps) · Gloucester County · (856) 224-6979· 60 certified beds · avg 30 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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★★5/5 · 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 8 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 5, 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. · F-0656 |
| Apr 18, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 18, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 12, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Apr 12, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time. · F-0888 |
| Apr 12, 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 |
| Apr 12, 2022 | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 1).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 4 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 1 | 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 →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 6.47 | 3.88 | 3.95 | top 2% in New Jersey; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.71 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 31% in New Jersey; top 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 6.04 | 3.53 | 3.50 | top 2% in New Jersey; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.62 | 0.50 | 0.48 | top 21% in New Jersey; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 39.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 37.7 | 42.9 | — |
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 5.85, RN 0.64, weekend 5.47.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.85 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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 Shady Lane Gloucester Co Home. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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 →
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kruger, Eric | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2005 |
| Kruger, Eric | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2024 |
| Strachan, George | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2011 |
| Visalli, Jessica | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2021 |
| Visalli, Jessica | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2024 |
All 5 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Rehabilitation & Healthcare at West Deptfor | 2.2 mi | West Deptford, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Advanced Subacute Rehabilitation Center at Sewell | 4.4 mi | Sewell, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Atlas Post Acute at Woodbury Country Club | 4.6 mi | Woodbury, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| United Methodist Communities at Pitman | 6.1 mi | Pitman, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Deptford Center for Rehabilitation and Healthcare | 6.1 mi | Deptford, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Elmwood Hills Healthcare Center LLC | 7.3 mi | Blackwood, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Aventura at Prospect | 7.5 mi | Prospect Park, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Little Flower Manor | 8.6 mi | Darby, PA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| St Monica Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare | 8.7 mi | Philadelphia, PA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Center for Rehab & Nursing Washington Township | 9.0 mi | Sewell, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St Francis Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare | 9.0 mi | Darby, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fox Subacute at South Philadelphia | 9.1 mi | Philadelphia, PA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Gloucester, NJ — 9 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 315405.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details