Maryland ›Rockville

Sterling Care Rockville Nursing

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

303 Adclare Road, Rockville, MD 20850 (opens Google Maps) · Montgomery County · (301) 279-9000· 100 certified beds · avg 84 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1977 · 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 Jan 22, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.26
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.

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

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

    The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint F-0641

  2. 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. · from a complaint F-0550

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · from a complaint F-0551

View all 29 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
Jan 14, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641
Jan 14, 2026D · 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
Jan 14, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · from a complaint · F-0551
Jan 14, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 14, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Jan 14, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0656
Jan 14, 2026D · 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
Jan 14, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0842
Jan 22, 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. · F-0550
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0558
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Jan 22, 2025D · 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
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 22, 2025D · 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. · F-0689
Jan 22, 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
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0727
Jan 22, 2025D · 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. · F-0756
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them. · F-0776
Jan 22, 2025D · 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
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
Jan 22, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0600
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0609
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · from a complaint · F-0710
Jan 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755

Inspection trend by year

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2025
All citations: 21
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2025210D
202680E

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 facilityMaryland averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.26
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: 2.81
Maryland average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityMaryland avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.263.833.95bottom 26% in Maryland; bottom 24% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.490.830.69bottom 15% in Maryland; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.813.433.50bottom 15% in Maryland; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.390.630.48bottom 26% in Maryland; bottom 50% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)46.240.245.8bottom 34% in Maryland; bottom 47% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)41.738.742.9bottom 39% in Maryland; top 50% 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 3.86, RN 0.58, weekend 3.33.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.86 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · 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 Sterling Care Rockville Nursing. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Jakobovits, NathanIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest50%11/01/2020
Kagan, JeffreyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Kagan, JeffreyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020

All 3 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.

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.

  • "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "How do you involve a resident's representative in care decisions, and how quickly are they consulted?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
  • "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"

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 46% 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 84 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Collingswood Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center0.6 miRockville, MD★★☆☆☆2/5
Potomac Valley Rehabilitation and Healthcare0.8 miRockville, MD★★★☆☆2/5
The Village at Rockville1.4 miRockville, MD★★★☆☆3/5
Shady Grove Nursing and Rehabilitation Center1.9 miRockville, MD★★☆☆☆1/5
Ingleside at King Farm2.0 miRockville, MD★★★★★4/5
Hebrew Home of Greater Washington3.3 miRockville, MD★★★★★4/5
Montcare at Potomac4.0 miPotomac, MD★★★★★4/5
Montcare at Bethesda4.6 miBethesda, MD★★★★★4/5
Wilson Health Care Center4.7 miGaithersburg, MD★★★★★5/5
Tuckerman Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center4.8 miNorth Bethesda, MD★★★★★5/5
Sterling Care Bethesda5.2 miBethesda, MD★★★☆☆3/5
Complete Care at Wheaton5.2 miWheaton, MD★★★★★4/5

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.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Rockville →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 215107.

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