Connecticut ›Hamden

Whitney Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

200 Leeder Hill Dr, Hamden, CT 06517 (opens Google Maps) · South Central Ct County · (203) 281-6745· 59 certified beds · avg 49 residents/day · certified since Jan 4, 1979 · 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 Dec 4, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
2.58
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.

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 30 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

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

    The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. F-0565

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

    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

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

    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

View all 30 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
Dec 4, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Dec 4, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Dec 4, 2024E · 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
Dec 4, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 4, 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. · F-0609
Dec 4, 2024D · 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. · F-0610
Dec 4, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 4, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0684
Dec 4, 2024D · 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
Dec 4, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Sep 7, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Sep 7, 2022D · 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
Sep 7, 2022D · 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
Sep 7, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 7, 2022D · 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
Sep 7, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 7, 2022D · 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. · F-0880
Sep 19, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 19, 2019E · 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
Sep 19, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Sep 19, 2019D · 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. · F-0600
Sep 19, 2019D · 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. · F-0609
Sep 19, 2019D · 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. · F-0610
Sep 19, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure care was delivered by qualified people following each resident's written care plan — the individualized document that spells out exactly what care that resident is supposed to receive. · F-0659
Sep 19, 2019D · 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
Sep 19, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Sep 19, 2019D · 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
Sep 19, 2019D · 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
Sep 19, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Sep 19, 2019B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2019130E
202270E
2024100E

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 facilityConnecticut averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 2.58
Connecticut average: 3.80
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.67
Connecticut average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.33
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)2.583.803.95bottom 2% in Connecticut; bottom 4% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.670.700.69top 38% in Connecticut; top 40% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.333.433.50bottom 2% in Connecticut; bottom 5% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.590.460.48top 21% in Connecticut; top 24% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)22.637.445.8top 8% in Connecticut; top 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)10.038.642.9top 3% in Connecticut; top 4% 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 2.63, RN 0.68, weekend 2.38.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.63 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · 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 Whitney Center. 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 →

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Devaney, JeffIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/14/2018
Jervis, JaneIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2014
Joyce, MargaretIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/26/2005
Matist, AnneIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE01/08/2017
Rambarose, MicahelIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Rambarose, MicahelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Sandberg, KennethIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Sandberg, KennethIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Santore, AnthonyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2010

All 9 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.

  • "Does your facility have an active resident council, and how does management respond to its concerns?"
  • "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
  • "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"

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 23% 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 66 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Leeway, INC1.9 miNew Haven, CT★★★★☆5/5
Arden Care Center2.0 miHamden, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Grimes Center2.7 miNew Haven, CT★★★★★4/5
Mary Wade Home2.8 miNew Haven, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Montowese Center for Health & Rehabilitation3.0 miNorth Haven, CT★★☆☆☆1/5
Hamden Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center3.1 miHamden, CT★★★☆☆4/5
Advanced Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation3.2 miNew Haven, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Autumn Lake Healthcare at the Willows3.3 miWoodbridge, CT★★★★☆4/5
New Haven Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation LLC3.4 miNew Haven, CT★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Whitney Rehabilitation Care Center3.7 miHamden, CT★★★☆☆3/5
Apple Rehab Laurel Woods4.7 miEast Haven, CT★★☆☆☆2/5
West Haven Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation5.1 miWest Haven, CT★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in South Central Ct, CT — 23 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 Hamden →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 075290.

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