The Pines at Medford
185 Tuckerton Road, Medford, NJ 08055 · Burlington County · 180 certified beds · avg 103 residents/day · certified since Jul 21, 1980
Abuse citation flag (CMS)SFF Candidate
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide · Dec 5, 2024 · F-0600
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.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (L): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation existed throughout the facility. The single most serious citation CMS can issue.
Corrected: Feb 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide · Dec 5, 2024 · F-0689
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 (L): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation existed throughout the facility. The single most serious citation CMS can issue.
Corrected: Jan 31, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide · Dec 5, 2024 · F-0835
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Why it matters: Poor administration often shows up as understaffing, supply shortages, and care problems across the whole facility.
Severity (L): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation existed throughout the facility. The single most serious citation CMS can issue.
Corrected: Mar 4, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 10, 2024 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Dec 17, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 10, 2024 · 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Mar 7, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (42)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 24, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint |
| Dec 7, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint |
| Dec 7, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 7, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint |
| Dec 7, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 5, 2024 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have an agreement with at least one Medicare- or Medicaid-certified hospital to ensure residents can be transferred quickly when they need hospital care. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have enough backup water supply for essential areas of the building. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Oct 10, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 10, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint |
| Apr 21, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility was not properly licensed, or did not operate in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and accepted professional standards. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| Feb 26, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 19).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 11 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 26 | 5 | L ▲ |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
2 fines totaling $215,633, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2026 | Fine | $50,224 |
| Oct 10, 2024 | Fine | $165,409 |
| Oct 10, 2024 | Payment Denial | 56 days from Jan 10, 2025 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | New Jersey avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 2.89 | 3.88 | 3.95 | bottom 3% in New Jersey; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.45 | 0.67 | 0.69 | bottom 31% in New Jersey; bottom 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.56 | 3.53 | 3.50 | bottom 3% in New Jersey; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.50 | 0.48 | bottom 38% in New Jersey; bottom 39% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 48.3 | 39.7 | 45.8 | bottom 26% in New Jersey; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 41.7 | 37.7 | 42.9 | bottom 40% in New Jersey; top 50% in the U.S. |
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 2.94, RN 0.46, weekend 2.60. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 4/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
- "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medford Leas | 0.9 mi | Medford, NJ | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Wiley Mission | 5.9 mi | Marlton, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Complete Care at Voorhees, LLC | 6.5 mi | Voorhees, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Complete Care at Kresson View, LLC | 7.1 mi | Voorhees, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Careone at Evesham | 7.6 mi | Marlton, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| The Fountains of Atco | 7.7 mi | Atco, NJ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| The Subacute at Autumn Lake Healthcare | 7.9 mi | Voorhees, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Echelon Care & Rehab | 8.3 mi | Voorhees, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Voorhees Pediatric Facility | 8.3 mi | Voorhees, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| St Mary's Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare | 8.4 mi | Cherry Hill, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lions Gate | 8.6 mi | Voorhees, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Berlin Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 8.7 mi | Berlin, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 315176.