Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
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 Bethany Nursing Home & Health Related Facility Inc during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident's advance directive preferences were not consistently identified, leading to a discrepancy between their MOLST indicating DNR status and a blue name tag indicating full code. Staff interviews revealed reliance on door indicators for code status, which were not updated, risking non-compliance with the resident's wishes.
The facility failed to ensure accurate MDS assessments for several residents, with errors in discharge information and medication documentation. A resident was incorrectly documented as discharged to the hospital instead of the community, and multiple residents were inaccurately recorded as receiving anticoagulants when only aspirin was prescribed. The MDS Coordinator admitted to the error, and the DON acknowledged the need for accurate documentation.
The facility did not ensure daily updates of nurse staffing information, with postings dated several days prior during a survey. Observations showed outdated information, and interviews revealed a breakdown in the process, with delays in posting by Unit Clerk #1 and untrained new supervisors. The DON acknowledged the need for staff training to address the issue.
Inconsistent Advance Directive Identification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's advance directives were consistently identified and honored. Resident #89, who was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, diabetes, and high blood pressure, had a Medical Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) indicating a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status. However, the resident's name tag outside their room was blue, indicating full code status, which contradicted the MOLST and physician's orders. This discrepancy was identified during the recertification survey, revealing that the facility's system for indicating code status was not consistently updated or accurate. Interviews with facility staff, including LPNs, a Unit Clerk, and the Director of Nursing, highlighted that the name tag system was used to quickly identify a resident's code status in emergencies. However, the Unit Clerk responsible for updating the name tags failed to change Resident #89's tag from blue to white after the MOLST was completed. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that all code status indicators should match and that discrepancies could lead to a resident's wishes not being followed. The staff were instructed to verify code status using the electronic health record and MOLST, rather than relying solely on the door indicator.
Inaccurate Resident Assessments in MDS Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate assessments for seven residents during a recertification survey. Specifically, the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments did not accurately reflect the residents' status. For Resident #96, the MDS Discharge Assessment incorrectly documented the resident as being discharged to the hospital, while records and staff interviews confirmed the resident was discharged to the community. This discrepancy highlights a failure in accurately coding Section A - Identification Information. Additionally, inaccuracies were found in Section N - Medications for six residents. Residents #2 and #50 were documented as receiving anticoagulant medications, but a review of physician orders revealed they were only prescribed aspirin, which should not be classified as an anticoagulant. The MDS Coordinator admitted to incorrectly documenting aspirin as an anticoagulant due to a lack of knowledge. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the MDS assessments should accurately reflect medications per the Resident Assessment Instrument manual, and the Administrator was aware of some discrepancies but had not identified specific issues with medication and discharge information.
Failure to Update Daily Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that daily nurse staffing information was updated and posted at the beginning of each shift during a recertification survey. Observations revealed that the nurse staffing information was not updated daily, with postings dated several days prior to the current date. Specifically, on 03/17/2025, the staffing information was dated 03/14/2025 in the morning and 03/15/2025 in the afternoon. By 03/18/2025, the information still reflected the date 03/15/2025, indicating a lack of daily updates. Interviews with staff revealed a breakdown in the process of updating and posting the nurse staffing information. Unit Clerk #1, responsible for updating the information on weekdays, admitted to delays in posting, sometimes not completing the task until late morning. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the responsibility for updating the information fell on Unit Clerk #1 and the weekend supervisor, but noted that newly hired supervisors had not been trained, contributing to the oversight. The Director of Nursing recognized the need for training and retraining staff to address the issue.
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 74 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 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 Horseheads
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elcor Nursing And Rehabilitation Center | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| St. Joseph's Hospital - Skilled Nursing Facility | 7.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Chemung County Health Center - Nursing Facility | 7.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Schuyler Hospital Inc And Long Term Care Unit | 11.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Corning Center For Rehabilitation And Healthcare | 11.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Bethany Nursing Home & Health Related Facility Inc.
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.