Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around April 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of October 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Bellhaven Center For Rehab And Nursing Care during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Insufficient CNA staffing was documented on multiple units and shifts when actual staffing fell below the facility assessment ranges. Units A1, B2, and C2 were repeatedly short on day and evening shifts, with some shifts staffed by only one or two CNAs instead of the required ranges. Interviews with the Staffing Coordinator, HR Director, DON, and Administrator confirmed ongoing call-outs, difficulty replacing staff, and a retention problem, with the facility relying on overtime, incentives, and CNA training classes to address the shortages.
A resident with a Foley/suprapubic catheter and severely impaired cognition was observed in the dining room and later in a hallway sitting area with the drainage bag uncovered and visible to other residents, staff, and visitors. The facility’s policy said CNAs or nursing staff were responsible for placing a privacy cover on the bag, but staff gave conflicting accounts about who should do it, and the care plan did not include a privacy-cover intervention.
A resident with dementia received an increased dose of quetiapine after a family request, despite no documented change in behaviors or depressive symptoms and no evidence of non-pharmacological interventions before the increase. The care plan for psychotropic use was incomplete, and staff interviews described the resident as pleasant, easily redirected, and without agitation or behavioral issues. The MD and psych NP both stated the dose increase was not supported by documentation, and the psych NP acknowledged the dementia diagnosis and black box warning.
Failure to implement ordered skin protection interventions for two residents. One resident with stroke, dementia, and Parkinson's disease had a care plan for bilateral Geri sleeves for senile purpura, but was observed without the sleeves and with an open arm wound, while staff were unaware of the intervention location in the CNA record. Another resident with CVA, PVD, dementia, and a stage 3 sacral PU had an order and care plan for a bed cradle every shift, but was repeatedly observed in bed without it, with the cradle left on the floor and sheets touching the feet; staff gave inconsistent accounts of who removed it and whether it was replaced.
Care plan not updated for wound-dressing removal behavior. A resident with stroke, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease had a behavioral care plan that did not include repeated removal of wound dressings and Geri sleeves, even though staff observed the resident picking at a senile purpura wound and frequently removing the dressing and protective sleeves. The resident was seen with an open arm wound, no dressing in place, and a used gauze on the floor, while the DON stated the care plans should reflect behaviors that lead to noncompliance with care.
A resident with TBI, localized edema, and PVD was observed with bilateral lower-extremity edema and ace wraps that were applied improperly and too tightly, with skin visible between the layers and bulging at the ankles. The unit manager stated the resident no longer had an active order or care plan for the wraps, and the physician was not notified of the recurrent edema.
An unlabeled cup containing topical wound dressing paste was left unattended on a resident’s dresser after an RN entered the room to apply the medication but left before the CNA was ready to provide care. The resident had Alzheimer’s disease, PVD, was totally dependent for ADLs, and required Triad Paste for a fungal rash and skin breakdown risk; the DON stated the RN should not have left the medication in the room.
Failure to Follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions During Foley Catheter Care: A resident with dementia, Parkinson’s disease, a feeding tube, and an indwelling catheter had an order for enhanced barrier precautions. Staff entered the room without a gown and handled a dislodged foley catheter, tubing, and urine-filled collection bag without the required PPE, despite signage outside the room and conflicting staff understanding of the gown requirement.
Facility Assessment did not include agency LPNs or Safety Aides used for resident care. Record review showed the facility hired agency LPNs and used Safety Aides, but the assessment last updated in 01/2026 did not document either staffing resource. The Administrator acknowledged the omission and stated both were used to meet resident care needs.
The facility did not assess residents for entrapment risk, review risks and benefits, or obtain informed consent before installing bed rails for several residents with seizure disorders and cognitive impairment. Instead of using proper side rail pads, staff often substituted blankets and pillows, which were taped or placed over the rails. Staff interviews confirmed this practice was common and that proper pads were difficult to locate. The facility's policy required padded side rails, but there was no evidence of proper assessment, documentation, or maintenance, resulting in Immediate Jeopardy and Substandard Quality of Care.
Several residents with seizure disorders and cognitive impairments were not assessed for bed rail entrapment risk prior to side rail installation, and makeshift padding such as blankets and pillows were used instead of proper side rail pads. The facility's Administrator was aware of and accepted this practice, and there was no documentation of resident or representative education or consent regarding the risks and benefits of side rail use.
The facility did not assess residents for bed rail entrapment risk before installing side rails and used blankets and pillows taped to rails instead of proper padding for several residents. Facility leadership was aware of this practice and considered it acceptable, but the QAPI committee did not review or address the issue.
A resident with cognitive impairment and mobility issues sustained a femoral fracture of unknown origin. The facility's investigation was inadequate, lacking documentation of staff accounts and a resident statement, failing to identify the root cause or rule out abuse, neglect, or mistreatment.
A resident with a language barrier did not have a comprehensive care plan addressing their communication needs. Despite the facility's policy on language services, the care plan lacked interventions for the resident who spoke French Creole. Staff interviews confirmed the oversight, and the facility's Administrator acknowledged the need for a care plan that included language-related interventions.
A facility failed to ensure a physician reviewed a resident's care program, leading to a discrepancy between the Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form and physician's orders. The MOLST form indicated intubation and long-term mechanical ventilation, while the physician's order stated not to intubate. The MOLST form had not been reviewed since its completion, contrary to facility policy requiring review every 90 days.
A facility failed to review and update a resident's Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form, leading to a discrepancy between the MOLST, the Comprehensive Care Plan, and the physician's order. The resident's MOLST form indicated intubation and long-term mechanical ventilation, while the physician's order and care plan documented a Do Not Intubate directive. The facility's policy required quarterly reviews of the MOLST form, which were not conducted, resulting in this oversight.
Insufficient CNA Staffing on Multiple Shifts
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff were available to provide nursing services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The deficiency was identified on three of six units, including A1, B2, and C2, during the sufficient and competent nurse staffing review task. The report states that the facility assessment and staffing policy established minimum CNA staffing ranges for each unit and shift, with the ability for the DON or designee to increase staffing based on resident needs or reduced census. A review of the Payroll-Based Journal Staffing Data Report and the facility’s actual staffing showed multiple shifts where staffing fell below the facility assessment requirements. Examples included Unit B2 having only two CNAs on the day shift instead of three to five, Unit C2 having two CNAs on the day shift instead of three to five, and Unit B2 having only one CNA on evening shifts instead of two to four. Similar shortages were documented on multiple weekends across October, November, and December 2025, and again during the survey period in May 2026, including Unit C2 having only two CNAs on the day shift instead of three to five. During interviews, the Staffing Coordinator stated there were days with insufficient staff on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift due to multiple call outs and that replacement staff could not always be found. The Human Resources Director stated the facility had staffing shortages on the day and evening shifts and that CNA hires often left after orientation. The DON stated the facility had shortages on all three shifts and a retention problem, and the Administrator acknowledged insufficient CNA staffing, noting frequent overtime, incentives, gift cards, bonus pay, and ongoing CNA training classes because staffing had worsened and retention remained a challenge.
Uncovered Foley Drainage Bag Visible in Common Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter was treated with dignity and privacy when the catheter drainage bag was left uncovered in common areas. Resident #9, who had diagnoses including obstructive and reflux uropathy, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and congestive heart failure, was assessed as having severely impaired cognitive function and was using an indwelling catheter. The resident’s care plan did not include an intervention for covering the urinary drainage bag with a privacy cover, even though the facility’s catheter care policy stated that licensed nursing staff or CNAs were responsible for placing a privacy cover over the drainage bag. During observation, the resident was seen in the dining room during lunch with the Foley catheter drainage bag uncovered and filled with yellow urine visible to other residents and staff. The resident was later wheeled to a hallway sitting area with other residents present, and the drainage bag remained uncovered and visible to residents, staff, and visitors. Interviews with CNA #1, LPN #3, RN #4, and the DON showed conflicting understanding of who was responsible for providing the privacy cover, and the DON stated that privacy bags should be readily available on each unit and that CNAs and nurses were responsible for providing them as part of ADL care.
Unnecessary Psychotropic Medication Increase Without Clinical Justification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with dementia was free from unnecessary psychotropic medication use when quetiapine was increased without documented clinical justification. Resident #24 had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer’s dementia, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder, and the admission MDS documented moderate cognitive impairment with mood symptoms such as feeling down, tired, and having trouble concentrating. The MDS also documented that the resident did not exhibit behaviors and did not receive psychotropic medications at that time. The resident’s care plan for psychotropic drug use identified quetiapine, trazodone, and Depakote, but it did not include goals or interventions. The physician’s order initially prescribed quetiapine 25 mg four times daily for major depressive disorder, totaling 100 mg per day. That order was later discontinued, and a new order increased quetiapine to 50 mg three times daily, totaling 150 mg per day. Review of the record showed no documented change in behaviors, no documented worsening of depressive symptoms, and no evidence that non-pharmacological interventions were used before the dose increase. A nursing note documented that the quetiapine was titrated upward at the request of a family member and due to apparent daily sundowning. Staff interviews described the resident as easily redirected, pleasant, and not exhibiting agitation or behavioral issues, only appearing more confused after lunch and looking for family members or visitors. The Medical Director stated there was a lack of documentation to justify the increase and that a family request alone was not sufficient reason to increase a psychotropic medication. The Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner stated they were not aware of documentation supporting the increase, acknowledged the dementia diagnosis and black box warning, and stated that increasing quetiapine for sundowning was not indicated.
Failure to Implement Ordered Skin Protection Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two residents whose plans of care included specific skin-protective interventions. One resident had diagnoses including stroke, dementia, and Parkinson's disease, and the comprehensive care plan for senile purpura directed staff to use bilateral Geri sleeves as tolerated. The resident was observed without the Geri sleeves in place on two separate occasions, and on one observation had an open wound on the right arm with a dark brown stain on the bed sheet, no dressing present on the wound, and a used gauze dressing on the floor. A CNA stated they did not know the resident required Geri sleeves and did not know where to find that information in the CNA accountability record, while the nurse manager stated the resident was picking at the wound and frequently removing the dressing. Another resident had diagnoses including cerebral infarction, peripheral vascular disease, and dementia, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, and had a stage 3 sacral pressure ulcer not present on admission. The resident's care plan and physician order required a bed cradle at the foot of the bed every shift while in bed to prevent the sheets from directly touching the resident's feet. The resident was observed multiple times in bed without the bed cradle in place, with the bed cradle on the floor in the room and the bed sheets directly contacting the resident's feet. Staff interviews showed inconsistent implementation of the ordered intervention. The unit manager and CNA stated the bed cradle had been removed during wound care and should have been replaced afterward, while an LPN stated the bed cradle had been seen on the bed and documented as in place. The wound care nurse stated they removed the bed cradle for treatment and could not recall whether it was replaced. The DON stated nursing staff were responsible for applying the bed cradle when the resident was in bed and reapplying it after care, and CNAs were responsible for ensuring it was not left on the floor.
Care Plan Not Updated for Wound-Dressing Removal Behavior
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to review and revise the comprehensive person-centered care plan by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for one resident with skin conditions. The resident had diagnoses including stroke, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease, and the admission MDS documented severe cognitive decline that prevented completion of the Brief Interview for Mental Status. The comprehensive care plan for behavioral symptoms dated 03/31/2026 did not include noncompliance behaviors related to removal of wound dressings and repeated pulling of dressings and Geri sleeves, and the skin integrity care plan dated 05/10/2026 included use of bilateral Geri sleeves as tolerated but did not reflect those behaviors. The nursing progress notes documented open purpura on the right upper arm, first aid, and a nurse practitioner order for normal saline, bacitracin, and a dry dressing for ten days. Review of the electronic medical record from 03/31/2026 through 05/18/2026 found no documentation of the resident removing wound dressings or Geri sleeves. During observation, the resident had an open wound on the right arm with no dressing present, a used gauze dressing on the floor, and was not wearing Geri sleeves. The nurse manager stated the resident was picking at the senile purpura wound and frequently removing the wound dressing and Geri sleeve, and the DON stated the care plans should be revised to reflect the resident’s status, including behaviors that lead to noncompliance with resident care.
Improperly Applied Ace Wraps and Unreported Recurrent Edema
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident #229 received treatment and care in accordance with orders and professional standards of practice. Resident #229 had diagnoses including traumatic brain injury, localized edema, and peripheral vascular disease, and the quarterly MDS documented moderately impaired cognition. A physician order had directed ace wraps to both lower extremities daily in the morning and removal at bedtime for 14 days, and the care plan included monitoring for signs and symptoms of fluid overload such as peripheral edema. During observation, Resident #229 was seated in a wheelchair with edema in both lower extremities and ace wraps applied to both lower legs. The wraps were not applied properly because skin was visible between the layers, and they were excessively tight with bulging skin between the wrapped layers. The unit manager stated the resident no longer had an active order or care plan for ace wraps, and also stated the resident’s lower extremities were edematous and the wraps were cutting off circulation to the ankles. The report also stated the physician was not notified of the reoccurrence of bilateral lower extremity edema.
Unlabeled topical medication left unattended in resident room
Penalty
Summary
Drugs and biologicals were not stored and labeled in accordance with accepted professional principles when an unlabeled medication cup containing topical wound dressing paste was found in Resident #1’s room on the dresser with no staff nearby. During the observation, the resident was lying in bed and was unable to state what was in the cup. The facility’s medication storage policy stated that all drugs and biologicals were to be stored in a safe, secure, and orderly manner, and nursing staff were responsible for maintaining the medication storage and preparation area in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner. Resident #1 had diagnoses including anemia, Alzheimer’s disease, and peripheral vascular disease, and was totally dependent on staff for activities of daily living and always incontinent of bowel and bladder. The resident’s care plan documented skin breakdown risk related to peripheral vascular disease, incontinence, impaired mobility, and a history of pressure ulcers, and included application of Triad Paste to the lower back, buttocks, and posterior thighs twice daily for a fungal rash. The physician’s order also directed application of Triad wound dressing paste to those areas twice daily for four weeks. An RN stated that the ointment had been placed on the dresser because the CNA was not ready to provide care and that it was forgotten when the RN left the room; the DON stated the RN should not have left the medication unattended in the resident’s room.
Failure to Follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions During Foley Catheter Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Resident #119 had diagnoses including stroke, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease, and the admission MDS documented severe cognitive decline, an indwelling catheter, and use of a feeding tube. The resident also had a physician’s order dated 03/31/2026 for enhanced barrier precautions related to the percutaneous epigastric tube and foley catheter. During an observation on 05/18/2026, enhanced barrier precaution signage was posted outside the resident’s room indicating gown and glove use for urinary catheter care, but Registered Nurse #1 entered the room without a gown. The nurse removed a dislodged foley catheter that was hanging from the side of the bed, along with the tubing and collection bag containing urine, and discarded them in the resident’s garbage bin while wearing gloves only. Urine was observed on the floor next to the bed. The nurse then removed gloves and sanitized hands. In interviews, the nurse stated being unaware the resident was on enhanced barrier precautions and not noticing the sign, while the Infection Preventionist stated gown and gloves were required for high-contact care activities including handling the dislodged foley catheter. The DON stated nurses did not need to wear a gown when handling a dislodged foley catheter, although a gown was needed for emptying urine from the catheter and for wound care dressing changes.
Facility Assessment Did Not Include Agency LPNs or Safety Aides
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to document the resources necessary to care for residents competently during day-to-day operations and emergencies in its Facility Assessment. The assessment policy reviewed in 01/2026 stated that the assessment is used to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both daily operations and emergencies, and that it is to be created, used, reviewed, and updated to make decisions about direct care staff needs and the facility’s capabilities to provide services to residents. Record review showed that the facility hired 20 LPNs through a nursing agency in the prior four months, and staffing sheets for 05/2026 showed the facility used Safety Aides, described as new graduates of the CNA training program who were not yet certified. The Facility Assessment last updated in 01/2026 did not include either the agency LPNs or the Safety Aides. During interview, the Administrator stated the facility uses Safety Aides for resident care and uses nursing agencies to meet the need for LPNs, and acknowledged that the Facility Assessment did not include either resource.
Failure to Assess, Educate, and Obtain Consent for Bed Rail Use; Improper Padding Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assess residents for the risk of entrapment prior to the installation of bed rails and did not review the risks and benefits of bed rail use with the residents or their representatives, nor did it obtain informed consent. This deficiency was identified for four residents with seizure disorders and varying degrees of cognitive impairment. Documentation in the medical records did not show evidence of risk assessments, education, or consent related to the use of bilateral quarter side rails, despite physician orders and care plans indicating seizure precautions and the use of side rails with padding. Observations revealed that instead of using proper side rail pads, staff frequently substituted blankets and pillows, which were taped or placed over the side rails. Staff interviews confirmed that this practice was common, especially when pads were unavailable, and that locating proper pads was often difficult. The DON, Administrator, and other nursing staff expressed the belief that blankets and pillows provided adequate padding and did not recognize the potential risks of suffocation or entrapment associated with these substitutes. However, a nurse practitioner and the bed manufacturer both indicated that using blankets or pillows could create gaps and increase the risk of entrapment, especially for residents with impaired cognition. The facility's policy required bilateral side rails with padding for residents with seizure diagnoses, but there was no evidence that the facility ensured the side rails and padding were correctly installed or maintained. Observations showed inconsistent and improper padding, and staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness regarding the need for proper assessment, documentation, and the risks associated with makeshift padding. The failure to assess, educate, obtain consent, and use appropriate equipment resulted in a situation of Immediate Jeopardy and Substandard Quality of Care, with a likelihood of serious harm to residents using bed rails.
Failure to Assess and Prevent Bed Rail Entrapment Risk
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assess residents for the risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to their installation and did not ensure that the bed rails did not pose a risk of entrapment, asphyxiation, suffocation, or injury. This deficiency was identified for four residents, all of whom had diagnoses such as seizure disorder, muscle wasting and atrophy, cerebral palsy, dementia, and asthma. Observations revealed that these residents had blankets and pillows taped to their side rails in place of proper side rail pads, a practice that was acknowledged and accepted by the facility's Administrator. There was no documented evidence in the medical records that these residents were assessed for entrapment risk before the installation of the side rails, nor that they or their representatives were educated about the risks and benefits or provided consent for the use of the side rails. Physician orders for seizure precautions specified the use of bilateral padded quarter side rails, but in practice, the facility substituted blankets and pillows for proper padding. Multiple observations confirmed the ongoing use of these makeshift pads, and interviews with the Administrator confirmed awareness and acceptance of this practice. The lack of proper assessment, documentation, and use of appropriate equipment directly contributed to the deficiency, with the potential to affect all residents in the facility.
Failure to Address Side Rail Padding Risks Through QAPI
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee developed and implemented appropriate plans of action to address issues related to side rail padding for four of twenty-seven residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not assess residents for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation and did not ensure that the bedrails did not pose a risk of entrapment, asphyxiation, suffocation, or injury. Observations revealed that blankets and pillows were attached with tape to the side rails in place of proper side rail pads for these residents, increasing the likelihood of entrapment. Interviews with facility leadership, including the Director of Nursing Services and the Administrator, confirmed awareness of the practice of using blankets and pillows as padding and indicated that this practice was considered acceptable by the facility. The issue had not been discussed or addressed in any QAPI committee meetings, and there was no evidence that the committee had reviewed, analyzed, or acted on available data regarding the identified concern.
Failure to Investigate Injury of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate an incident involving a resident who sustained a fracture of unknown origin. The incident involved a resident with diagnoses including Dementia, Type 2 Diabetes, and Major Depressive Disorder, who used a walker and wheelchair for mobility and required assistance for bed mobility and transfer. On 3/19/2024, the resident was found to have a femoral fracture after complaining of left leg pain. The facility's investigation did not identify the root cause of the injury, nor did it include a statement from the resident or detailed staff accounts of any falls or trauma prior to the injury. The Registered Nurse Risk Manager conducted an investigation by interviewing staff who cared for the resident 48 hours before the incident, but the staff responses were not documented. The Director of Nursing Services acknowledged that the staff statements should have included any instances of falls or trauma to rule out abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. The facility's policy required a thorough investigation of injuries of unknown origin, but the documentation was insufficient to rule out abuse, neglect, or mistreatment.
Failure to Address Language Barrier in Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a comprehensive person-centered care plan was developed for a resident with a language barrier. Specifically, the care plan for a resident who primarily spoke French Creole did not include interventions to address the language barrier, despite the facility's policy on language services. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia, Hyperlipidemia, and Hypertension, and was unable to complete a mental status interview. Observations and interviews confirmed that the resident communicated in French Creole, yet the care plan lacked specific measures to address this communication need. Interviews with staff revealed that the regularly assigned Certified Nursing Assistant could communicate with the resident due to shared language skills, but the care plan did not reflect this. A Registered Nurse, who was covering as Unit Manager, acknowledged the oversight and stated that the care plan should have included the language barrier and appropriate interventions. The facility's Administrator also confirmed that a comprehensive care plan should have been in place to address the resident's preferred language, utilizing available resources such as translation services.
Discrepancy in Life-Sustaining Treatment Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a physician reviewed each resident's total program of care, including treatments and medications, as required. Specifically, for one resident, there was a discrepancy between the Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form and the physician's orders. The MOLST form, completed on 7/20/2023, indicated that the resident was to be intubated and provided with long-term mechanical ventilation if necessary. However, the physician's order dated 8/10/2024 stated that the resident was not to be intubated. This inconsistency was not addressed, as the MOLST form had not been reviewed since its completion. The facility's policy requires that the MOLST form be reviewed with each 90-day resident review, but this did not occur for the resident in question. Interviews with the Adult-Gerontology Nurse Practitioner and the Medical Director confirmed that the MOLST form should be reviewed to ensure it matches the physician's orders for advance directives. The failure to review and update the MOLST form led to a mismatch between the resident's documented wishes and the physician's orders, highlighting a deficiency in the facility's adherence to its own policies and procedures.
Failure to Review and Update Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all residents were provided with medically-related social services to maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. This deficiency was identified for a resident whose Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form, dated 7/20/2023, indicated the resident was to be intubated and provided with long-term mechanical ventilation. However, the facility did not review or revise the MOLST form since its completion, leading to a discrepancy between the MOLST form, the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan, and the physician's order, which documented a Do Not Intubate directive. The facility's policy required the MOLST form to be reviewed quarterly during care plan meetings, but this was not adhered to in the case of the resident. Interviews with the Director of Social Work and the Director of Nursing Services revealed that the oversight was due to a failure to ensure consistency between the MOLST form, the physician's orders, and the care plan. The Social Worker responsible for the resident was unavailable for an interview, but another Social Worker confirmed that the MOLST form should be reviewed quarterly with the designated representative, nursing, and social worker during care plan meetings.
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 109 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 4 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 Brookhaven
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brookhaven Health Care Facility, Llc | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Swan Lake Nursing And Rehabilitation | 3.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Medford Multicare Center For Living | 4.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Island Nursing And Rehab Center | 6 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Sayville Nursing And Rehabilitation Center | 6.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Bellhaven Center For Rehab And Nursing Care.
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 October 2026) and official state health department websites.