Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around October 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 Hudsonview Health Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to report an allegation of mistreatment involving a cognitively impaired resident with multiple diagnoses, including Alzheimer's disease, muscle wasting, and an unstageable sacral pressure ulcer. The resident's POA reported that a sheet was tied to the edge of the bed, alleging the resident was tied. An RN investigated, found the resident not tied, and family present, and a grievance form, staff statements, and a skin assessment showing no visible injury were completed. The DON later stated the allegation was not reported to NJDOH because the resident was found not to be tied, despite facility policy requiring all alleged abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment to be reported to state authorities within specified time frames.
Inconsistent pre-dialysis assessment and documentation for residents receiving HD. Three residents with ESRD or CKD had scheduled off-site dialysis, but records showed no consistent pre-HD nursing assessments, and the HD forms only captured clinic and post-HD information. Staff stated that vital signs and access site checks should be done before departure, yet documentation in ePNs was inconsistent and one MAR showed meds charted as given while a resident was out for dialysis.
The facility failed to fully calibrate and verify accuracy for both glucometers on medication carts, with records showing only one monitor being checked even though two were in use. The facility also failed to ensure a resident’s sitagliptin was available for administration, and an LPN borrowed the medication from another resident’s supply and gave it to the resident. The resident had severe cognitive impairment and was receiving sitagliptin for blood sugar control.
MDS Coding Errors for Dialysis and Discharge Status: The facility inaccurately coded the MDS for two residents. One resident with ESRD was receiving dialysis three times weekly, but the annual MDS incorrectly indicated no dialysis while a resident. Another resident’s discharge MDS was coded as an unplanned discharge even though the record showed discharge planning was in place and the resident went home with family.
A resident with DM2 and severe cognitive impairment had a Humalog order that included a 9 PM half-dose instruction, but the MAR did not clearly reflect a separate half-dose sliding scale. Staff administered insulin at bedtime using the standard sliding scale amounts, and the RN unit manager acknowledged the order should have been clarified. The CP later stated the half-dose note was missed during the MRR.
An inspection found that CDS in one med cart were not properly secured because the lock box was not closed or locked and could be opened without a key. An LPN said the box should be locked but sometimes would not close easily because of how the meds were arranged. The CP stated CDS should be stored behind two separate locks in its own compartment, and facility policy required double-lock storage.
Failure to Report Allegation of Resident Mistreatment to State Authorities
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of mistreatment to the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) as required by its own policy and state regulations. A resident with diagnoses including muscle wasting and atrophy, Alzheimer's disease, adult failure to thrive, history of falling, an unstageable sacral pressure ulcer, and unspecified dementia was documented on a recent MDS as having severely impaired cognitive skills, rarely or never understanding others, and rarely or never being able to make themself understood. On 11/10/2025, the resident's POA called the facility around 7:10 PM and reported that there was a sheet tied to the edge of the resident's bed, alleging that the resident was tied. RN #1 went to the room to investigate and found that the resident was not tied with the sheet, and family members were present in the room at that time. A Nursing Home Resident Grievance Form was completed and signed by the DON and the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator, and four staff statements were obtained. A skin assessment was completed for the resident on the same date related to the incident and revealed no wounds, marks, or visible injury. During a follow-up telephone interview, the DON stated that the allegation from 11/10/2025 was not reported to the NJDOH because the resident was found not to be tied, and further explained that the family alleged the resident was tied at the end of the bed, not around the body. The facility’s Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment and Misappropriation of Resident Property policy, last reviewed 10/2025, states that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, are to be reported immediately or within 24 hours to the administrator and appropriate officials, including the State Survey Agency. Despite this policy, the allegation was not reported to NJDOH.
Inconsistent pre-dialysis assessment and documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe, appropriate hemodialysis care for three residents who required dialysis services. Resident #2, Resident #11, and Resident #220 all had diagnoses including end-stage renal disease or chronic kidney disease and were scheduled for off-site HD on set days and times. The report states that the facility did not consistently provide or document pre-dialysis nursing assessments for these residents before they left for dialysis, even though staff stated that vital signs and access site checks should be completed before departure. For Resident #2, the resident stated that they often left the facility at 2:00 PM for a 3:00 PM HD appointment and were frequently not assessed by a nurse before leaving. The medical record showed HD orders for Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, but the HD form only contained post-dialysis information and the July 2025 progress notes did not show pre-dialysis nursing assessments. The July 2025 MAR also showed folic acid, ferrous sulfate, and vitamin C documented as given on dialysis days when the resident was out of the building. The LPN assigned to the resident stated that nurses should check vital signs and the HD access site before the resident leaves and upon return, but was unclear where the pre-dialysis assessment should be documented. For Resident #11 and Resident #220, the surveyor found similar gaps in the record. Resident #11 had ESRD, intact cognition, and an order for HD Monday, Wednesday, and Friday with pickup at 8:30 AM, while Resident #220 had ESRD, intact cognition, and an order for HD every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday with pickup at 5:00 AM. In both cases, the HD form included only clinic and post-dialysis documentation and did not contain a pre-dialysis assessment section, and the electronic progress notes showed no consistency in pre-dialysis nursing assessments. The LPN/UM stated that assessing the resident before dialysis is essential and acknowledged that some nurses did not evaluate and document the resident before leaving for the dialysis center.
Inadequate glucometer calibration and borrowing of another resident’s medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services in accordance with professional standards when blood glucose monitors used for residents were not fully calibrated and checked for accuracy. On the third floor, two glucometers were observed on a medication cart, but the control record showed only one glucometer was calibrated daily from 7/1/25 through 7/30/25. The LPN stated that one glucometer was used while the other dried after disinfection, and the RN/UM confirmed the record reflected only one glucometer being calibrated, checked for functionality, and checked for accuracy. A review of the third floor glucometer control record from May 2025 through July 2025 also reflected only one glucometer was calibrated. A similar condition was observed on the fourth floor medication cart, where two glucometers were present but the control record again reflected only one glucometer being calibrated daily from 7/1/25 through 7/30/25. The LPN stated both glucometers were used and alternated between residents while one dried after disinfection, but neither nurse could identify which glucometer was calibrated for accuracy. The RN/UM confirmed the record reflected only one glucometer being calibrated, checked for functionality, and checked for accuracy. The July 2025 glucometer control records for the 5th through 9th floors also reflected only one glucometer being calibrated, checked for functionality, and checked for accuracy. The facility also failed to ensure timely receipt of sitagliptin for a resident with diagnoses including hypertension and major depressive disorder, and with severe cognitive impairment as reflected by a BIMS score of 6 out of 15. During medication administration, an LPN could not locate the resident’s sitagliptin 50 mg and obtained the same medication labeled for another resident, then administered it to the resident. The LPN stated the usual procedure was to search for the medication and borrow it from another resident if needed, although later the LPN stated the facility policy was not to borrow medications and to obtain them from the facility backup supply. The consultant pharmacist stated medications should be checked in backup supply and, if unavailable, the physician should be called; medications should never be borrowed from another resident.
MDS Coding Errors for Dialysis and Discharge Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code the MDS for Resident #220. The resident was observed in bed, awake and alert, and stated they had returned from dialysis that morning and had been receiving dialysis for more than five years. Record review showed the resident had ESRD, an annual MDS dated 6/16/25 that scored the resident 15/15 on the BIMS and coded dialysis while a resident as "No," even though the order summary showed dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 6:00 AM with pickup at 5:00 AM. The care plan also identified the resident as at risk for complications due to hemodialysis, and the LPN/UM confirmed the resident went to dialysis three times a week. The facility also failed to accurately code the discharge MDS for Resident #274. The resident’s Discharge Return Not Anticipated MDS dated 5/1/25 coded the discharge as unplanned, while progress notes showed the resident was discharged home with family and had discharge planning in place throughout the stay. The MDSC/RN stated the discharge MDS should have been coded to indicate a planned discharge.
Insulin Order Not Properly Clarified or Followed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow a physician’s order and acceptable professional standards of practice for insulin administration for one resident with type 2 diabetes mellitus and severe cognitive impairment. The resident’s physician order for Humalog specified subcutaneous administration before meals and at bedtime, with a sliding scale and a note for “9PM half dose insulin,” but the order entry in the MAR listed the sliding scale without a separate clarified 9 PM half-dose instruction. On multiple occasions, the resident’s 9 PM blood glucose values were documented and insulin was administered according to the standard sliding scale amounts rather than a clearly entered half-dose order. During record review and interview, the RN unit manager stated that the 9 PM dose was intended to be half of the sliding scale dose and acknowledged that a separate order should have been entered to specify the half-dose sliding scale. The consultant pharmacist later stated the 9 PM half-dose comment had been missed during the medication regimen review and was not a typical insulin order. The report also notes that the facility’s medication administration policy required staff to read the MAR for the ordered medication, dose, dosage form, route, and time.
Controlled Substances Not Secured in Medication Cart
Penalty
Summary
Controlled Substance medications were not properly secured in one of four medication carts observed in the facility. During an inspection of the 6th floor medication cart, the surveyor opened the drawer where CDS were stored and found that the lock box containing the CDS was not closed or locked and could be opened without a key. The LPN assigned to the cart stated that the box should be locked, but the medications inside sometimes prevented it from closing easily and it had to be shut very hard. The survey team later discussed the concern with facility leadership and interviewed the consultant pharmacist, who stated that CDS should be stored behind two separate locks in its own compartment, with both the med cart and the CDS box locked. The facility’s policies also stated that Schedule II drugs are to be stored under double-lock and key and that controlled substances are to be double locked.
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 1,661 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 22 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 North Bergen
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complete Care At Harborage Llc | 0.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 1 |
| The Riverside | 1.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Harbour View Senior Living Corp | 1.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 22 | 0 |
| Amsterdam Nursing Home Corp (1992) | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| The New Jewish Home, Manhattan | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Hudsonview Health Care Center.
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.