How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Waterfront Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
633 State Route 28, Raritan, NJ 08869 (opens Google Maps) · Somerset County · (908) 526-8950· 138 certified beds · avg 132 residents/day · certified since Oct 15, 1972 · 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: ATLAS HEALTHCARE (29 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 24, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.50
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. F-0686
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
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint F-0842
View all 28 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Nov 24, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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 |
| May 30, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 30, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| May 30, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| May 30, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| May 30, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0809 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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. · F-0551 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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. · F-0600 |
| May 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0644 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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 |
| May 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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 |
| May 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| May 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| May 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0806 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0640 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0636 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | 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 22, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time. · F-0888 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 2).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 3 | 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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityNew Jersey averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.50
New Jersey average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.45
New Jersey average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.28
New Jersey average: 3.53
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New Jersey avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.50 | 3.88 | 3.95 | bottom 41% in New Jersey; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.45 | 0.67 | 0.69 | bottom 29% in New Jersey; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.28 | 3.53 | 3.50 | bottom 49% in New Jersey; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.30 | 0.50 | 0.48 | bottom 29% in New Jersey; bottom 32% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 34.3 | 39.7 | 45.8 | top 36% in New Jersey; top 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 62.5 | 37.7 | 42.9 | bottom 10% in New Jersey; bottom 19% 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 2.97, RN 0.38, weekend 2.78.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.97 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Waterfront Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Copper NJ Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Gold NJ Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Malt Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Meisner, Robert | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| NJ Mazel Parentco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| NJ Noble Parentco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Rivers Edge Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 04/01/2023 |
| SGS 2010 Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Silver NJ Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Tyh 2017 Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2023 |
| Bak, Pinchos | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2023 |
| Goldberger, Shlomo | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2023 |
All 12 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 Atlas Healthcare — 29 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.
- Wynwood Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Cinnaminson, NJ · overall 2/5
- Bride Brook Rehabilitation & Nursing Center — Niantic, CT · overall 5/5
- Manchester Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Manchester, CT · overall 5/5
- Pendleton Rehabilitation and Nursing Center — Mystic, CT · overall 5/5
- Suffield House Rehabilitation and Healthcare Cente — Suffield, CT · overall 4/5
- Vernon Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Vernon, CT · overall 5/5
- Village Green Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Bristol, CT · overall 2/5
- Hathorne Hill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Danvers, MA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 28 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the New Jersey 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 34% 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 65 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bridgeway Care and Rehab Center at Bridgewater | 0.0 mi | Bridgewater, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Complete Care at Green Knoll | 1.3 mi | Bridgewater, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Arbor at Laurel Circle | 2.2 mi | Bridgewater, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| N J Eastern Star Home | 3.0 mi | Bridgewater, NJ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bridgeway Care and Rehab Center at Hillsborough | 5.3 mi | Hillsborough, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Skilled Nursing at Fellowship Village | 6.0 mi | Basking Ridge, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Somerset Woods Rehabilitation & Nursing Center | 6.0 mi | Somerset, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Foothill Acres Rehabilitation & Nursing Center | 6.2 mi | Hillsborough, NJ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Careone at Somerset Valley | 6.3 mi | Bound Brook, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Parker at Somerset, INC | 7.9 mi | Somerset, NJ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Regency Heritage Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 8.1 mi | Somerset, NJ | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Accelerate Skilled Nursing and Rehab Piscataway | 8.8 mi | Piscataway, NJ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Somerset, NJ — 15 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Abingdon Care & Rehabilitation Center — Green Brook, NJ · overall 2/5
- McAuley Hall Health Care Cente — Watchung, NJ · 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 315140.