Connecticut ›Durham

Twin Maples Healthcare, INC

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

809 New Haven Road #R, Durham, CT 06422 (opens Google Maps) · Lower Ct River Vly County · (860) 349-1041· 44 certified beds · avg 43 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 2003 · 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 →

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 22, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Oct 9, 2025
$24,928
Fines, last 3 years
3.78
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: 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 9, 2025 · 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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: Dec 5, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 27 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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. · from a complaint F-0585

  2. G · Actual harm, 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

  3. 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. · from a complaint F-0658

View all 27 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
Feb 19, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0585
Oct 9, 2025▲ G · Actual 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
Oct 9, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658
Jul 3, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · from a complaint · F-0808
May 22, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
May 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. · from a complaint · F-0656
May 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. · F-0657
May 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0678
May 22, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
May 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. · F-0755
May 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
Nov 12, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0636
Aug 13, 2024D · 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
Feb 2, 2024D · 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
Feb 2, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Jun 22, 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
Jun 22, 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
Jun 22, 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. · F-0689
Jun 22, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Jun 22, 2023D · 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. · F-0755
Jun 22, 2023D · 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
Jun 22, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758
Jun 22, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 22, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 22, 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
Jun 22, 2023C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have enough backup water supply for essential areas of the building. · F-0922
Jul 14, 2021D · 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 7).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202110D
2023110E
202440E
2025101G ▲
202610D

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 →

1 fine totaling $24,928.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
Oct 9, 2025Fine$24,928

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: 3.78
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.95
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.30
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)3.783.803.95top 41% in Connecticut; top 49% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.950.700.69top 18% in Connecticut; top 18% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.303.433.50bottom 48% in Connecticut; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.380.460.48bottom 47% in Connecticut; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)35.337.445.8top 47% in Connecticut; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.338.642.9top 36% in Connecticut; top 33% 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 3.18, RN 0.80, weekend 2.77.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.18 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Twin Maples Healthcare, INC. 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
Jackson, ShelleyIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, TheodoreIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Caron, JohnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/06/2022
Caron, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/06/2022
D'amico, MicheleIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/13/1997
Jackson, ShelleyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, ShelleyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, ShelleyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, ShelleyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, TheodoreIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, TheodoreIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, TheodoreIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Jackson, TheodoreIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/1997
Walaliyadda, AnuruddhaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2016
Walaliyadda, AnuruddhaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/25/2025

All 15 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

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?"
  • "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "Who oversees residents' therapeutic diets, and how do the doctor and dietitian work together on them?"
  • "How often do you evaluate your nurse aides and what ongoing training do they receive?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
  • "Are staff on every shift trained and certified in CPR, and how do they know each resident's resuscitation wishes?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Connecticut 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 35% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 15 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 (12 closest of 75 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Connecticut Baptist Homes, INC5.1 miMeriden, CT★★☆☆☆2/5
Apple Rehab Coccomo5.5 miMeriden, CT★☆☆☆☆2/5
Complete Care at Meriden5.6 miMeriden, CT★★★★☆3/5
Apple Rehab Middletown5.6 miMiddletown, CT★★★☆☆2/5
Regency House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center5.7 miWallingford, CT★★★★★4/5
Wadsworth Glen Health Care and Rehabilitation Cent6.6 miMiddletown, CT★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse
Water's Edge Center for Health & Rehabilitation6.9 miMiddletown, CT★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Silver Springs Care Center7.5 miMeriden, CT★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Masonicare Health Center7.6 miWallingford, CT★★☆☆☆3/5
Curtis Home St Elizabeth Center, the7.6 miMeriden, CT★☆☆☆☆2/5
Meriden Health and Rehab7.7 miMeriden, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Skyview Rehab and Nursing8.1 miWallingford, CT★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Lower Ct River Vly, CT — 17 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 Durham →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075431.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

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