New Jersey ›Bridgeton

South Jersey Extended Care

99 Manheim Avenue, Bridgeton, NJ 08302 · Cumberland County · 167 certified beds · avg 65 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1980

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.04
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (38)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Nov 26, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Nov 26, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Jun 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping.
Jun 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Jun 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Jun 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jun 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Jun 19, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records.
Jun 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jun 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint
Jun 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint
Aug 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint
Aug 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 28, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Mar 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Mar 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Mar 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Mar 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
Mar 28, 2023C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility has more than 120 beds but did not hire a qualified full-time social worker as required.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (18 → 9).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202390F
2024200F
202590F

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)

MeasureThis facilityNew Jersey avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.043.883.95top 10% in New Jersey; top 13% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.540.670.69bottom 48% in New Jersey; bottom 44% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.823.533.50top 8% in New Jersey; top 8% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.440.500.48top 43% in New Jersey; top 42% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)53.039.745.8bottom 16% in New Jersey; bottom 29% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.037.742.9—

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 3.59, RN 0.39, weekend 3.43. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Weisz, MarkIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—08/29/2002
Comprehensive Health Care Management Systems LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2002
Krausman, StevenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2002

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Preferred Care at Cumberland2.7 miBridgeton, NJ★★★★☆4/5
Big Oak Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center6.5 miPittsgrove, NJ★★☆☆☆3/5
Millville Center9.4 miMillville, NJ★★☆☆☆1/5
New Jersey Veterans Memorial Vineland11.3 miVineland, NJ★★★☆☆2/5
Bishop McCarthy Center for Rehab & Healthcare11.5 miVineland, NJ★★☆☆☆2/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Vineland12.7 miVineland, NJ★★★☆☆3/5
Autumn Lake Healthcare at Salem County16.3 miSalem, NJ★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Bridgeton →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315061.