How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Sterling Care Bethesda
5721 Grosvenor Lane, Bethesda, MD 20814 (opens Google Maps) · Montgomery County · (301) 530-1600· 200 certified beds · avg 180 residents/day · certified since Feb 10, 1989 · 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: STERLING CARE (6 facilities, chain avg rating 4.2★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 27, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.08
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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 38 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0558
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. F-0580
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. F-0584
View all 38 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0558 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · F-0627 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | 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 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 27, 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 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Apr 27, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 27, 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 |
| Feb 5, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. · from a complaint · F-0809 |
| Feb 5, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0578 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0600 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0760 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Aug 29, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0600 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0585 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have policies on smoking. · F-0926 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Jan 31, 2020 | B · Potential for 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. · F-0609 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 14).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 16
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 11 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 16 | 0 | F |
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 facilityMaryland averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.08
Maryland average: 3.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.49
Maryland average: 0.83
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.71
Maryland average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Maryland avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.08 | 3.83 | 3.95 | bottom 12% in Maryland; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.49 | 0.83 | 0.69 | bottom 14% in Maryland; bottom 36% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.71 | 3.43 | 3.50 | bottom 8% in Maryland; bottom 17% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.31 | 0.63 | 0.48 | bottom 9% in Maryland; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.9 | 40.2 | 45.8 | bottom 31% in Maryland; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 23.8 | 38.7 | 42.9 | top 18% in Maryland; top 20% 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 3.08, RN 0.49, weekend 2.71.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.08 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sterling Care Bethesda. 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 - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BBF Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 06/01/2022 |
| Frankel, Chaim | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Jek Irrv Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| NMJ Irrv Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Sava Acquisition LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Kagan, Jeffrey | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Kagan, Jeffrey | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
All 7 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 Sterling Care — 6 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.
- Sterling Care Forest Hill — Forest Hill, MD · overall 5/5
- Sterling Care Hillhaven — Adelphi, MD · overall 5/5
- Sterling Care Riverside — Belcamp, MD · overall 5/5
- Sterling Care Rockville Nursing — Rockville, MD · overall 4/5
- Sterling Care Bel Air — Bel Air, MD · overall 3/5abuse
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Maryland midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 48% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 89 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tuckerman Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 0.5 mi | North Bethesda, MD | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Maplewood Park Place | 0.7 mi | Bethesda, MD | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Montcare at Bethesda | 1.0 mi | Bethesda, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Carriage Hill Bethesda | 1.3 mi | Bethesda, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Hebrew Home of Greater Washington | 2.1 mi | Rockville, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Turtle Creek Rehabilitation and Wellness Center | 2.9 mi | Kensington, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Chevy Chase | 3.1 mi | Chevy Chase, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Oakview | 3.1 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Wheaton | 3.1 mi | Wheaton, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Montcare at Wheaton | 3.9 mi | Wheaton, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Woodside Rehab & Nursing | 4.1 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fox Chase Healthcare | 4.3 mi | Silver Spring, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Montgomery, MD — 34 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Sterling Care Rockville Nursing — Rockville, MD · overall 4/5
- The Village at Rockville — Rockville, MD · overall 3/5
- Wilson Health Care Center — Gaithersburg, MD · overall 5/5
- Althea Woodland Nursing Home — Silver Spring, MD · overall 4/5
- Autumn Lake Healthcare at Arcola — Silver Spring, MD · 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 215187.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).