Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around December 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Complete Care At Shorrock during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Failure to protect residents from resident-to-resident physical abuse. A resident with severely impaired cognition and a history of agitation was involved in three separate incidents with other residents who also had severe cognitive impairment. Staff documented yelling, verbal altercations, and physical contact when the resident was being redirected or moving in the hallway, including contact with another resident’s shoulder and head. The DON/abuse coordinator stated the facility did not substantiate abuse and viewed the contact as incidental rather than intentional.
Failure to Report Alleged Physical Abuse: The facility did not immediately report an allegation of physical abuse involving two residents to the SA. One resident with severe cognitive impairment was reported to have struck another resident and attempted to remove the other resident's pants. The Administrator stated the allegation was not reported, while the CM said the incident was discussed with the DON and Administrator after being brought forward by the UM/LPN. The facility policy required reporting all alleged violations and substantiated incidents to the SA.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Resident-to-Resident Abuse: The facility did not thoroughly investigate multiple resident-to-resident abuse allegations involving residents with severe cognitive impairment. Investigations relied on vague descriptions of contact, did not include interviews or body audits for other residents on the unit, and in one case did not interview the only witness or obtain a written statement. The Administrator stated the investigations were considered thorough, but could not explain the lack of detail or why the witness was not interviewed, and the facility also did not investigate an allegation that one resident struck another and attempted to remove the resident’s pants.
Missing Appeal Information on Transfer and Bed Hold Notices: The facility failed to provide written transfer/bed hold notices with required appeal information to three residents and their RRs when the residents were transferred to the hospital. The residents were cognitively intact per MDS/BIMS findings, and review of the facility form showed it did not include the appeal process required by policy.
Failure to Care Plan Indwelling Urinary Catheter: A resident with moderate cognitive impairment, obstructive uropathy, and an indwelling urinary catheter had a comprehensive care plan that did not address the Foley catheter as a focus area. The DON, LPN/NM, and IP all stated the catheter needed to be care planned, and the facility policy required a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address identified medical and nursing needs.
A resident with CHF, AFib, and a PE had an order for oxygen at 2 LPM via NC continuously, but observations showed the concentrator set at 3.5 LPM on multiple occasions. An LPN confirmed the mismatch, and the DON stated staff are expected to follow physician orders; the facility policy required oxygen to be given under physician orders except in an emergency.
The facility failed to provide adequate incontinence care and ADL support, as several residents were found with soiled briefs and missed scheduled showers. Staff admitted to being unable to provide timely care due to high resident-to-staff ratios. Additionally, residents' grooming needs were neglected, with observations of long, jagged, and soiled fingernails.
The facility failed to ensure proper assessment and care planning for two residents receiving hemodialysis. Both residents lacked physician's orders to check bruit and thrill every shift, and one resident's care plan did not address dialysis. The facility's Hemodialysis Access Care policy was not followed, as confirmed by the DON.
The facility failed to provide adequate staffing, resulting in neglect of residents' incontinence care and scheduled showers. Several residents were found in unsanitary conditions, with saturated incontinence briefs and clothing, due to CNAs being assigned too many residents. Additionally, residents reported not receiving their scheduled showers, with the facility often being short-staffed. The DON confirmed that care standards were not met, highlighting the facility's inability to maintain adequate staffing levels.
The facility was found to have multiple deficiencies in food storage and sanitation practices. Observations included food stored directly on the floor, missing freezer curtains leading to temperature issues, frost-covered food items, and ice buildup in the freezer. Additionally, dented cans, pitted cutting boards, and improperly dried cookware were noted, all of which could contribute to microbial growth. The LNHA acknowledged these issues, indicating a failure to follow facility policies.
The facility failed to properly dispose of and maintain cardboard waste, as observed by a surveyor. One dumpster was overfilled with intact cardboard boxes, preventing the lid from closing, and piles of boxes were found around the dumpster area and in the fire zone of the parking lot. The Dining Service Director acknowledged the unsanitary condition, and the Maintenance Director confirmed the area was unacceptable. The Licensed Nursing Home Administrator did not respond when asked if the area was maintained properly, despite the facility's policy requiring staff to break down boxes and keep the area clean.
The facility failed to maintain infection control standards during meal service and wound care. Staff did not perform hand hygiene between handling meal trays and assisting residents, contrary to the facility's policy. Additionally, an LPN did not sanitize equipment used during wound care, and a CNA did not follow proper handwashing procedures after handling a soiled brief.
A CNA was found sleeping in a resident's room, suspected of being under the influence of a substance, and was terminated without the facility reporting the incident to the NJDOH. The CNA admitted to taking too much anxiety medication but failed to provide a prescription. The facility did not conduct a drug test, violating their policies on maintaining a safe environment and reporting requirements.
A CNA was found sleeping during her shift in a resident's room, reportedly under the influence of a substance. Despite the facility's policy requiring investigation of such incidents, the DON did not conduct a drug test or collect staff statements. The CNA, who was assigned to care for residents needing assistance with a hoyer lift, claimed she took too much anxiety medication but never provided a prescription. The facility failed to ensure a drug-free workplace as per its policy.
A facility failed to ensure timely documentation by a resident's primary physician, with multiple late entries in the Physician's Progress Notes (PPN) for a resident admitted with joint replacement aftercare and knee prosthesis issues. The PPNs were documented days to over a month after the visits, contrary to the facility's policy requiring timely documentation. This was confirmed by the ADON and DON during the survey.
A facility failed to ensure that a physician conducted face-to-face visits and wrote progress notes every 30 days for a resident admitted with dementia and polyosteoarthritis. The resident's electronic medical record lacked any physician assessments, only containing Nurse Practitioner assessments. The ADON confirmed the absence of physician entries, and the DON later verified that no physician assessments were on record, violating the facility's policy requiring physician visits every 30 days for the first 90 days post-admission.
Failure to Protect Residents from Resident-to-Resident Physical Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect residents from physical abuse by another resident for three of five residents reviewed for abuse. The report identifies R24 as the resident involved in the incidents. R24’s record showed diagnoses including mood disorder due to known physiological condition, anxiety, and depression, and a quarterly MDS with a BIMS score of 00 out of 15, indicating severely impaired cognition. The care plan noted that R24 could become argumentative with other residents and included interventions to monitor for triggers and warning signs of agitation and to direct the resident away from other residents if escalation began. Three resident-to-resident incidents were documented involving R24 and other residents with severely impaired cognition. In one incident, staff were alerted by yelling between R129 and R24, separated the residents, and as R24 was being separated, R24’s hand made contact with R129’s shoulder; no related nursing documentation was found. In another incident, staff reported that R24 had a verbal altercation with another resident and, when redirected away, R24’s hand came in contact with R64; an LPN later stated R24 swatted and hit R64 on the shoulder. In the third incident, while in the hallway in view of staff, R24 came in contact with the side of R106’s head; an LPN later stated R24 came up from behind and swiped/mushed R106 in the face with a hand, with no verbal exchange. The Administrator stated the facility did not substantiate abuse in any of the three incidents and believed the contact was incidental rather than intentional.
Failure to Report Allegation of Physical Abuse to the State Agency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of physical abuse involving one resident against another resident immediately to the State Agency. Review of the record showed the resident who was allegedly involved in the incident had severe cognitive impairment, with a BIMS score of 2 out of 15, and diagnoses including coronary artery disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia, and anxiety disorder. The other resident involved also had severe cognitive impairment, with a BIMS score of 4 out of 15, and diagnoses including anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia; that resident was receiving antipsychotic and antidepressant medication and was later discharged from the facility. An email provided by the Administrator stated that the two residents had a physical altercation in which one resident struck the other and attempted to remove the other resident's pants. During interviews, the Administrator stated the facility did not report the allegation of physical abuse to the SA, and the CM stated he/she discussed the incident with the DON and Administrator after being informed by the UM/LPN. The Administrator also stated that a nurse witnessed no contact between the residents at the time the allegation was made. The facility policy titled Compliance with Reporting Allegations of Abuse/Neglect/Exploitation stated that the facility will report all alleged violations and all substantiated incidents to the state agency.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Resident-to-Resident Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate resident-to-resident abuse involving four residents who were reviewed for abuse. The residents involved had significant cognitive impairment, including BIMS scores ranging from 00 to 08 out of 15, indicating severely impaired cognition. The incidents involved R24 making contact with other residents during interactions on the unit, including contact with a resident’s shoulder, side of the head, and during a verbal altercation while residents were passing in the hallway or near the nurse’s station. For the incidents involving R129, R64, and R106, the facility’s investigational summaries stated that the events were not premeditated and that the residents had no memory of the events shortly afterward. The summaries also stated that skin and pain assessments were completed and no injuries were noted. However, the investigations did not include resident interviews or body audits for other residents on the unit, and the staff statements did not describe what specifically occurred beyond vague references to contact or an incident being reported. The staff who were the only persons to witness the 10/04/25 incident involving R106 were not interviewed and did not provide a written statement. During interview, the Administrator, who was also the abuse coordinator, stated the investigations were thorough, but also stated that the witness would need to write a more colorful statement and that staff who received the report only needed to document that an incident was reported to them. The Administrator could not explain why the investigations used the term contact without further detail and stated he/she did not know why the nurse who witnessed the 10/04/25 incident was not interviewed. The Administrator also stated that other residents were not interviewed because many residents on the unit had low BIMS scores. In addition, the facility did not investigate an allegation involving R177 and R105 after being informed that R105 struck R177 and attempted to remove R177’s pants; the Administrator stated the facility did not investigate because the nurse who witnessed the incident said there was no contact and only discharge plans and a fall were discussed.
Missing Appeal Information on Transfer and Bed Hold Notices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that three residents and their resident representatives were provided a written bed hold policy and transfer notice that included appeal information when the residents were transferred to the hospital. R20 was admitted to the facility, later transferred to the hospital for a GI bleed, and returned to the facility; R20's quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating cognitive intactness. R158 was admitted to the facility, was sent to the hospital for evaluation and treatment after complaining of shortness of breath, and later returned; R158's quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, indicating cognitive intactness. R18 was admitted to the facility and later discharged to the hospital; R18's quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, indicating cognition was not impaired. Review of the Transfer/Bed Hold notice prior to Hospitalization or Therapeutic Leave provided for these residents showed that the form did not include the appeal process. During interviews, the Administrator stated the facility had been providing residents and resident representatives with a written transfer and discharge notice and was aware the notice should include appeal information, while the Social Service Director stated the form was sent to the resident and resident representative but did not include the required appeal information and that he/she was unaware it was required. The facility policy stated the transfer/discharge notice must include an explanation of the right to appeal, the state entity contact information, how to obtain an appeal form, and how to obtain assistance with completing and submitting the appeal request.
Failure to Care Plan Indwelling Urinary Catheter
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that addressed the use of an indwelling urinary catheter for one resident reviewed for urinary catheter use. Review of the resident’s record showed admission and readmission to the facility, a 5-Day Modification MDS with a BIMS score of 10 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and diagnoses including obstructive uropathy and use of an indwelling urinary catheter. The Treatment Administration Record showed the resident’s indwelling urinary catheter was inserted on 02/15/25. Review of the resident’s comprehensive care plan showed the indwelling Foley catheter was not addressed as a focus area. During interviews, the DON stated that an indwelling urinary catheter should be care planned, the LPN/NM stated the care plan needed to be updated to reflect the indwelling urinary catheter, and the IP also stated the care plan needed to be updated to reflect the Foley catheter. The facility policy titled Comprehensive Care Plan stated that a comprehensive person-centered care plan is to be developed and implemented for each resident to meet identified medical, nursing, and all other services in the comprehensive assessment.
Oxygen Therapy Not Administered as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
Failure to provide oxygen therapy as ordered occurred for one resident with diagnoses including congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and pulmonary embolism. Review of the resident’s EMR showed an order dated 12/29/25 for oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula continuously every shift. However, during observation on 01/06/26 at 10:46 AM, the resident was receiving oxygen from a concentrator via nasal cannula set at 3.5 LPM. Subsequent observations on 01/07/26 at 10:49 AM and 3:47 PM again showed the concentrator set at 3.5 LPM instead of the ordered 2 LPM. An LPN confirmed the concentrator was set to 3.5 LPM and acknowledged the order was for 2 LPM. The DON stated staff are expected to follow physician orders and noted that while nurses may use discretion to titrate oxygen when saturation is low before contacting a physician, that process should occur over a few hours, not days. The facility policy stated oxygen is administered under physician orders except in an emergency and that staff shall notify the physician of changes in oxygen concentrations.
Deficiencies in Incontinence Care and ADL Support
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate incontinence care and assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) for several residents. Observations revealed that multiple residents were left in soiled incontinence briefs for extended periods, contrary to the facility's policy of changing briefs every two hours. For instance, one resident was found in bed with urine-saturated jeans and bed sheets, indicating a lack of timely care. Another resident was observed with a saturated incontinence brief, suggesting that the brief had not been changed as required. These incidents were corroborated by interviews with staff who admitted to being unable to provide care due to high resident-to-staff ratios. Additionally, the facility failed to provide scheduled showers for residents, as evidenced by reports from residents and their representatives. One resident reported not receiving their scheduled showers on multiple occasions, and this was confirmed by a review of the facility's shower sheets. The staff acknowledged that showers were often missed due to staffing shortages, which prevented them from adhering to the scheduled shower days. The facility also neglected proper grooming care, as observed in residents with long, jagged, and soiled fingernails. Staff interviews revealed that both nurses and CNAs were responsible for nail care, yet it was not consistently performed. The facility's policy required daily checks and cleaning of residents' nails, but this was not adhered to, leading to the observed deficiencies in personal hygiene and grooming care.
Failure to Ensure Proper Hemodialysis Assessment and Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents receiving hemodialysis were properly assessed according to professional standards of practice. This deficiency was identified for two residents, both of whom had specific medical orders related to their dialysis treatment and access sites. Resident #62, who had diagnoses including end-stage renal disease and heart failure, was observed to have a permacatheter and an AV fistula. However, there was no physician's order to check for bruit and thrill every shift, nor was there a care plan addressing dialysis. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) and Unit Manager/LPN confirmed the lack of necessary assessments and care planning. Similarly, Resident #84, with chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease, also lacked a physician's order to check bruit and thrill every shift. Although the resident's care plan included some dialysis-related interventions, it did not specifically address the need for regular assessment of the AV shunt. The Unit Manager/LPN acknowledged the oversight and noted that the resident's shunt had been revised multiple times, with a history of blood clots. The facility's Hemodialysis Access Care policy outlined the need for regular monitoring of dialysis access sites to prevent infection and maintain patency. Despite this policy, the facility did not ensure that the necessary assessments were documented in the residents' medical records every shift. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the absence of required physician's orders and care plans for both residents, acknowledging the deficiency in the facility's adherence to professional standards of practice.
Inadequate Staffing Leads to Neglect in Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient and competent staff to meet the needs of residents, particularly in providing incontinence care and scheduled showers. Several residents were observed in unsanitary conditions, with saturated incontinence briefs and clothing, indicating a lack of timely care. For instance, Resident #94 was found in bed with urine-soaked jeans and bed sheets, despite the CNA initially claiming care had been provided. The CNA later admitted to not having provided care due to being assigned ten residents that day. Similarly, Resident #16 was found with a saturated incontinence brief, and the CNA responsible for their care was unreachable for comment. The surveyor's observations revealed that the facility's staffing levels were inadequate, with CNAs being assigned an excessive number of residents, making it difficult to provide timely incontinence care. On one unit, a CNA was responsible for 18 residents during a shift, which contributed to the neglect of residents' needs. The DON confirmed that incontinence care should be provided every two hours during the day and twice during the night shift, but this standard was not met, as evidenced by the conditions of Residents #8, #109, and #137. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure residents received showers as scheduled. Residents #95 and #94 reported not receiving their scheduled showers, with the facility often being short-staffed, leading to missed shower days. The UM/LPN confirmed that the shower sheets were not signed, indicating that showers were not provided as scheduled. The DON acknowledged that showers should be given on assigned days, and if missed, should be rescheduled for the following day. This deficiency highlights the facility's inability to maintain adequate staffing levels to meet the basic care needs of its residents.
Deficiencies in Food Storage and Sanitation Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly store potentially hazardous foods, maintain sanitary conditions, and ensure food safety standards were met. During a kitchen tour, the surveyor observed several deficiencies, including food items such as ice cream cups and frozen vegetables stored directly on the floor, which is against the facility's policy of keeping items at least six inches off the floor. The walk-in freezer had missing vinyl strip curtains, leading to increased temperatures and frost accumulation on food items like beef hamburger patties and broccoli florets. Additionally, the freezer's condenser unit had a significant ice buildup, and the ice cream chest also had ice accumulation. The facility's dry storage contained a dented can of sweet potatoes, and several cutting boards were deeply pitted and discolored, which could harbor bacterial growth. Wet nesting of cookware was observed, with some pans containing debris and damage, contrary to the facility's policy requiring air drying to prevent microbial growth. The Licensed Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged these issues, and the facility's policies on dishwashing, kitchen equipment inspection, and product placement were reviewed, highlighting the failure to adhere to established guidelines.
Improper Disposal of Cardboard Waste
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly dispose of and maintain cardboard waste in the dumpster areas, as observed by a surveyor during a tour of the kitchen. The surveyor noted that one of the three garbage dumpsters was overfilled with intact cardboard boxes, preventing the lid from closing. Additionally, piles of intact cardboard boxes were found surrounding the sidewalk of the dumpster area and in the fire zone of the facility parking lot. The Dining Service Director (DSD) acknowledged that the cardboard boxes should not have been left around the dumpster area and admitted that the area was not being maintained in a sanitary manner. Further interviews revealed that the Maintenance Director (MD) was unaware of the condition until after the surveyor's observation, and confirmed that the area was unacceptable. The Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) stated that the facility's policy allowed for cardboard boxes to be stored next to the dumpster if it was full, but did not respond when asked if the area was maintained in an acceptable condition. The facility's Garbage and Trash Disposal Policy required that all staff break down cardboard boxes and maintain the area free from refuse, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Infection Control Deficiencies in Meal Service and Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper infection control standards during meal service in two of five dining areas. Staff members, including a Unit Manager, LPN, and Activity Aide, were observed handling multiple residents' meal trays and utensils without performing hand hygiene between each interaction. This lack of hand hygiene was confirmed by interviews with the staff, who were unclear about the necessity of hand sanitation between handling trays and assisting residents with meals. The facility's handwashing policy requires hand hygiene before and after handling food and assisting residents, which was not adhered to during these observations. In another instance, the facility did not follow appropriate infection control practices during wound treatment for a resident with severe medical conditions, including a stage 4 pressure ulcer. An LPN was observed performing wound care without sanitizing equipment used during the procedure, such as scissors and a marker, before placing them back into the treatment cart. The LPN acknowledged the mistake, and the DON confirmed that all items used in a resident's room should be disinfected before being returned to the treatment cart. Additionally, a CNA was observed providing ADL care to a resident without following proper handwashing procedures. After handling a soiled adult brief, the CNA did not lather her hands with soap for the required 20 seconds before rinsing. This was confirmed by the CNA and the DON, who reiterated the facility's policy that requires staff to lather hands with soap for a minimum of 20 seconds to prevent the spread of infection.
Failure to Report Alleged Neglect and Substance Influence
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) about an allegation of neglect involving a Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) who was found sleeping during a shift in a resident's room. The CNA, who was suspected to be under the influence of a substance, was terminated after the incident. The CNA had been hired on November 16, 2023, and was terminated on January 17, 2024, after admitting to taking too much of her anxiety medication, which she never documented or provided a prescription for. The facility did not conduct a drug test on the CNA, as she claimed to have a prescription, which was never confirmed. The Director of Nursing (DON) received a report from a Supervisor that the CNA was very sleepy and was found sleeping in a resident's room. Despite being woken up and returning to work, the CNA was found sleeping again and was sent home. The next day, the CNA admitted to the DON that she had taken too much of her anxiety medication due to stress but failed to provide the prescription. The facility's policy required employees suspected of being under the influence to be sent for drug testing, but this was not done in this case. The DON did not report the incident to any agency or licensing boards, as she was unsure of the reporting requirements. The facility's policies on abuse, neglect, and substance abuse in the workplace emphasize the importance of maintaining a safe environment for residents and ensuring a drug and alcohol-free workplace. The CNA was assigned to care for fourteen residents, including those requiring assistance with a hoyer lift, which posed a safety concern given her impaired state. The facility's failure to report the incident and conduct a drug test was a violation of their policies and state regulations.
Failure to Investigate Allegation of Neglect
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to investigate an allegation of neglect involving a Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) who was found sleeping during her shift in a resident's room. The CNA, who was reportedly under the influence of a substance, was hired on 11/16/23 and terminated on 1/17/24. The CNA claimed she had taken too much of her anxiety medication, but she never provided a prescription or the name of the medication. The Director of Nursing (DON) did not conduct a drug test or an investigation, nor did she collect statements from other staff members. The facility's policy requires investigation and reporting of any allegations of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment, but this was not followed in this case. The incident occurred on 12/12/23, when the CNA was assigned to care for fourteen residents, including those requiring assistance with a hoyer lift. The DON confirmed that the CNA was found sleeping in a resident's room and was sent home after being found sleepy and unable to perform her duties safely. The facility's Substance Abuse in the Workplace policy prohibits staff from being under the influence while on duty, yet the facility did not adhere to its policy of ensuring a drug-free workplace by failing to investigate the CNA's condition or confirm her medication use.
Physician Documentation Delays in Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the resident's primary physician wrote and signed the Physician's Progress Notes (PPN) at the time of each visit. This deficiency was identified for a resident who was admitted with diagnoses including aftercare following joint replacement surgery and infection/inflammation reaction due to an internal right knee prosthesis. The review of the electronic medical record (eMR) revealed multiple instances where the PPNs were entered as late entries, indicating they were not documented on the effective date of service. Specifically, there were five instances where the PPNs had effective dates ranging from February 15 to February 21, but the created dates were significantly later, with some entries made over a month after the visit. The issue was confirmed during interviews with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the Director of Nursing (DON), who acknowledged that the physician did not document and sign the PPNs at the time of the visits. The facility's Physician Visits policy, last reviewed in January 2024, mandates that the attending physician must perform relevant tasks, including documentation, at the time of each visit. This deficiency was brought to the attention of the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA), DON, ADON, Regional Nurse, and Regional LNHA during the survey process.
Failure to Conduct Required Physician Visits
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the physician responsible for supervising the care of residents conducted face-to-face visits and wrote progress notes at least every 30 days. This deficiency was identified during a review of the closed medical record for a resident who was admitted with diagnoses including dementia and polyosteoarthritis. The resident was in the facility for a total of 66 days, yet the surveyor was unable to locate any physician assessments in the electronic medical record, only finding handwritten physical assessments by a Nurse Practitioner. The Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed the absence of physician assessment entries upon reviewing the resident's electronic medical record. The facility's policy required the attending physician to visit patients at least once every 30 days for the first 90 days following admission. However, the Director of Nursing later confirmed that there were no physician assessments on record for the resident, indicating a failure to adhere to the facility's policy and regulatory requirements.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 365 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 14 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Brick
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rose Garden Nursing And Rehabilitation Center | 2.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 20 | 1 |
| Harrogate Village | 3 mi | ★★★★★ | 15 | 0 |
| Complete Care At Bey Lea, Llc | 3.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
| Complete Care At Green Acres | 3.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Hampton Ridge Healthcare And Rehabilitation | 3.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Complete Care At Shorrock.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.