Connecticut ›Sharon

Sharon Center for Health & Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

27 Hospital Hill Road, Sharon, CT 06069 (opens Google Maps) · Nw Hills County · (860) 364-1002· 88 certified beds · avg 79 residents/day · certified since Nov 18, 1992 · 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: NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES (42 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 29, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 27, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.31
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 27, 2026 · 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. J · Immediate jeopardy, 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

  2. 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

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    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

View all 35 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 27, 2026▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Aug 29, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from being involuntarily separated — kept apart from other residents, kept out of their own room, or confined to their room. Isolating a resident this way is a form of mistreatment. · F-0603
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 29, 2025B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Aug 29, 2025B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Feb 7, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 20, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · from a complaint · F-0578
Aug 20, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0756
Aug 23, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Aug 23, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · F-0810
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · F-0909
Aug 23, 2023C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851
Aug 23, 2023B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577
Aug 23, 2023B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0657
Jul 14, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0600
Jul 14, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637
Jul 14, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 14, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202140D
2023170E
202420D
2025110E
202611J ▲

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.31
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.91
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.96
Connecticut average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityConnecticut avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.313.803.95top 23% in Connecticut; top 28% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.910.700.69top 21% in Connecticut; top 20% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.963.433.50top 21% in Connecticut; top 24% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.600.460.48top 20% in Connecticut; top 23% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)31.437.445.8top 29% in Connecticut; top 17% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)20.038.642.9top 17% in Connecticut; top 13% 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 3.55, RN 0.75, weekend 3.25.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.55 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · 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 Sharon Center for Health & Rehabilitation. 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.

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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Cedar Hill Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Ehrenfeld, MindyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Gilmartin, ThomasIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Ilana Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Juniper Capital Associates LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Mydert Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest51%06/07/2024
Oak Management Capital LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Ysro TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/07/2024
Zadun Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest49%06/07/2024
Baker Tilly Advisory Group LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2024
Baker, EdwardIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Cohen, JesseIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
David Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Gilmartin, ThomasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Ilana Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Lopiansky, RebeccaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Marc Ephram Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
Michelle Ostreicher Family TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/06/2025
National Health Care Associates INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/07/2024

Showing 20 of 26 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 6 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain National Health Care Associates — 42 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 41 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
  • "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
  • "Under what circumstances, if any, would a resident ever be kept in their room or separated from others?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"

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 31% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 26 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Noble Horizons8.3 miSalisbury, CT★★☆☆☆1/5SFF
Geer Nursing and Rehabilitation11.9 miCanaan, CT★★★★★4/5
Havencare at Litchfield Woods18.1 miTorrington, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Wolcott Hall Nursing Center, INC18.8 miTorrington, CT★★☆☆☆3/5
Torrington Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC19.7 miTorrington, CT★★★★☆3/5
Candlewood Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center19.9 miNew Milford, CT★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Nw Hills, CT — 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.

All facilities in Sharon →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075379.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details