Below 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 August 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Cuba Memorial Hospital Inc Snf during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and dementia was verbally and physically assaulted by another resident during meal service when the other resident yelled at them, grabbed both arms, and threw them back into a wheelchair. Staff separated the residents, and the abused resident was found with red marks and a scratch, then became visibly upset and cried, which the MD described as emotional trauma.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Alleged Neglect Involving Blood Sugar Checks: The facility did not maintain documentation showing a thorough investigation of an alleged neglect incident involving two residents and an LPN who reportedly did not complete blood sugar checks. The incident summary lacked staff statements and detailed interviews, and the Administrator could not locate the reported investigations. Staff interviews described unreliable glucometers and recalled the allegation, but the facility could not produce the full investigation record.
Failure to Post and Update Nursing Staffing Information: Surveyors found the facility did not post the BIPA/Daily Schedule in a prominent public area on some days and did not update it each shift with the current census and actual hours worked by licensed and unlicensed nursing staff. The posted sheets did not reflect staffing changes, and there was no documented evidence the required form had been completed, updated, or made readily available to the public for an extended period. Interviews showed the Scheduler and Administrator were unaware of the posting and update requirements until recently.
A resident with dementia was administered a pneumococcal vaccine without consent, despite a verbal declination from their Health Care Proxy. Facility staff, including the DON, acknowledged the error, indicating a failure to respect the resident's right to refuse treatment.
The facility failed to notify the representatives of two residents about significant changes in their medical conditions. One resident was given Haldol without prior family notification, resulting in adverse reactions. Another resident developed a Stage 2 pressure ulcer, and the family was not informed. Staff interviews confirmed the expectation of notifying families about such changes, highlighting a lapse in communication and documentation.
The facility failed to provide care according to professional standards for two residents. One resident with Alzheimer's and diabetes did not receive a Registered Nurse assessment for a pressure ulcer, and no physician's order was obtained for treatment. Another resident with dementia and lung cancer was given Haldol without a comprehensive assessment after a behavior change. Facility policies and staff interviews highlighted the need for proper assessments and physician orders, which were not followed.
The facility failed to maintain accurate medical records for several residents, with orders not entered under the correct prescriber's name. For example, a resident with dementia had orders for Haloperidol and Ativan incorrectly documented, and another resident with cellulitis had an antibiotic order entered under the wrong provider. Staff interviews revealed issues with the electronic medical record system and a lack of communication about updating provider lists.
Failure to Protect Resident from Abuse by Another Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from verbal, mental, and physical abuse by another resident. The abused resident had Arnold Chiari Syndrome with hydrocephalus, Alzheimer's disease, and dementia without behavioral disturbances, and was documented as severely cognitively impaired on the MDS. Their care plan included interventions for psychosocial well-being such as comfort, reassurance, and a safe, quiet, low-stimuli environment. The other resident involved had vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance, bipolar disorder, and depression, and was documented as moderately cognitively impaired with poor safety awareness and a history of non-compliance. During meal service in the dining room, the abused resident was making a throat-clearing/grunting noise when the other resident yelled across the room to shut up. The other resident then stood up, quickly walked over, grabbed the abused resident by both arms, and threw them back into their wheelchair. A family member called for help, staff responded immediately, and the residents were separated. The abused resident was assessed by nursing and had red marks on their arms and a scratch on their back from being thrown into the chair. Following the incident, the abused resident was visibly upset and cried; the Medical Director documented that the event was an emotional trauma and that the resident cried a lot. The resident's family reported that the resident was visibly upset and crying, which was unusual for them given their dementia. Staff interviews also described the resident as sobbing uncontrollably and stated the event was traumatic. The Medical Director stated that if someone grabbed someone else unwantedly, it could be considered abuse.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Alleged Neglect Involving Blood Sugar Checks
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that alleged violations of abuse and neglect were thoroughly investigated for two residents. The deficiency involved Resident #2, who had diagnoses including Type 2 diabetes mellitus, schizophrenia, and obstructive sleep apnea and was documented as cognitively intact, and Resident #6, who had diagnoses including Type 2 diabetes mellitus, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder and was also documented as cognitively intact. The policy titled Abuse- Identification, Investigation, and Reporting stated that suspicious or actual abuse was to be immediately reported and investigated through staff, patient, family, elder interviews, observation, and follow-up investigation. The allegation involved Resident #6 reporting that LPN #4 did not perform a blood sugar check, and Resident #2 stating they did not think LPN #4 checked their blood sugar either. The facility Incident Report Summary documented that the Former Director of Nursing brought the concern to the Former Administrator and that a full investigation was initiated, but the summary did not include attached staff interviews or statements. The Internet Quality Improvement and Evaluation System Complaint/Incident Investigation Report also documented that the Former Administrator reported the allegation of neglect to the New York State Department of Health. During the survey, the Administrator was unable to locate the facility-reported investigations for the residents. Staff interviews indicated that glucometers at the facility were unreliable and sometimes did not work correctly, and multiple staff members stated they remembered the issue involving blood sugar checks. The Former Administrator stated that staff statements had been scanned into the computer and hard copies shredded, but the documents could not be produced. The Administrator later reviewed the incident summary and stated it was not a thorough investigation because it was general, lacked written staff statements, and did not document interviews with all staff who came in contact with the residents or used the glucometers.
Failure to Post and Update Nursing Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that nursing staff information was posted daily in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors, and failed to keep the posting updated with the required information. Surveyors observed that on 06/07/2026 and 06/08/2026 the Daily Schedule was not visible and could not be located in the facility, and on 06/09/2026 through 06/11/2026 it was posted on a bulletin board across from the elevators leading to the facility units. The posted documents included the current census number and total hours worked and ratios for direct care staff, but they did not include updated licensed and unlicensed staff hours for each shift. Review of the Daily Schedule sheets dated 06/07/2026 through 06/11/2026 showed that the hours of licensed and unlicensed staff did not reflect staffing schedule changes. There was no documented evidence that the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act form was completed, updated, or posted and readily available for the public for 05/07/2026 through 06/06/2026. During interviews, the Scheduler stated they had just started three weeks earlier, had posted the first BIPA form on 06/08/2026, and had not been completing or posting the form in a public area before then. The Scheduler also stated they were unaware that changes needed to be made each shift when staffing changed. The Administrator stated the BIPA posting should be readily available in a public area and updated each shift with staffing changes, and acknowledged being unaware that it had not been posted publicly on 06/07/2026 and 06/08/2026 or updated with staffing changes from 06/07/2026 through 06/11/2026.
Failure to Honor Resident's Right to Refuse Treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's right to refuse treatment, specifically the administration of the pneumococcal vaccine, which was given without consent. Resident #10, who had diagnoses including dementia and diabetes mellitus, was documented as having moderate cognitive impairment and was unable to make their own health care decisions. The Health Care Proxy for Resident #10 had verbally declined the pneumococcal vaccine, as documented on the consent/waiver form. Despite this, the resident received the vaccine, as recorded in the Medication Administration History Report. Interviews with facility staff, including Registered Nurses and the Director of Nursing, revealed that the vaccination was administered after the declination was obtained, and the consent form was filled out incorrectly. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the error, stating that Resident #10 should not have received the vaccine as the family had declined it. The Medical Director and Administrator both emphasized the expectation that the resident's wishes should have been followed, highlighting a failure in the facility's process to ensure consent was accurately documented and respected.
Failure to Notify Residents' Representatives of Changes in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to immediately inform the representatives of two residents about significant changes in their medical conditions, which is a violation of their policy and residents' rights. Resident #39, who had severe cognitive impairment and was receiving palliative care, was administered Haldol, an antipsychotic medication, without prior notification to the family. The resident exhibited adverse reactions to the medication, which were only communicated to the family after they noticed the resident's unusual behavior during a visit. Interviews with staff, including the Director of Nursing and Nurse Practitioner, confirmed that the family should have been notified before administering the medication, especially given its potential as a chemical restraint. Resident #28, who was severely cognitively impaired and at risk for pressure ulcers, developed a Stage 2 pressure ulcer on the left buttock. The facility did not notify the resident's representative of this development or the subsequent treatment. Additionally, there was no documentation of notification regarding a reddened area on the coccyx that required treatment. Interviews with nursing staff revealed a lack of communication and documentation regarding the resident's skin condition, with the Director of Nursing stating that the family should have been notified within 24 hours of any change in condition. The facility's failure to adhere to its policy of notifying residents' representatives of changes in condition and treatment resulted in a deficiency. The lack of timely communication and documentation regarding the administration of medication and the development of pressure ulcers highlights a significant lapse in the facility's duty to keep families informed, as required by their own policies and residents' rights.
Deficiencies in Resident Care and Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, as evidenced by deficiencies found during a complaint investigation. For Resident #28, who was admitted with Alzheimer's disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, there was no Registered Nurse assessment for a reddened area on the coccyx, and no physician's order was obtained for the treatment of a Stage 2 pressure ulcer. The resident's care plan indicated a risk for altered skin integrity, yet the chronological nursing progress notes revealed a lack of proper documentation and assessment by a Registered Nurse for the pressure ulcer and subsequent treatments. Additionally, Resident #39, who had diagnoses including unspecified dementia and lung cancer, experienced a change in behavior and was administered an antipsychotic medication, Haldol, without a comprehensive assessment by a Registered Nurse. The resident's care plan highlighted the need to monitor for changes in behavior due to pain, but the progress notes lacked evidence of a thorough assessment when the resident became agitated and after receiving the medication. The Director of Nursing and other staff interviews confirmed the expectation for Registered Nurses to conduct and document comprehensive assessments in such situations. The facility's policies and job descriptions outlined the responsibilities of Licensed Practical Nurses and Registered Nurses, including the need for physician orders for treatments and comprehensive assessments for changes in resident conditions. However, the investigation revealed that these standards were not met, leading to deficiencies in the care provided to the residents. Interviews with staff, including the Medical Director and Director of Nursing, further emphasized the expectation for proper assessment and documentation, which was not adhered to in these cases.
Inaccurate Medical Record Entries
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain complete and accurately documented medical records for several residents, as identified during a standard survey. Specifically, medical orders were not accurately entered under the prescribing provider's name in the medical records for six residents. The facility's policy required verbal orders to be documented immediately by the receiver and co-signed by the prescriber within 48 hours, but this was not adhered to in multiple instances. For Resident #39, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including dementia and lung cancer, orders for Haloperidol and Ativan were not entered under the correct prescriber's name. The orders were created by nursing staff and entered as written orders by the Medical Director, who signed them electronically weeks later. Interviews with staff revealed a misunderstanding or misapplication of the process for entering and signing orders, with the Medical Director's name being used incorrectly. Similar issues were found with Residents #3 and #41, where orders were entered under the Medical Director's name instead of the actual prescriber. Resident #3, with moderate cognitive impairment and cellulitis, had an antibiotic order entered incorrectly. Resident #41, with severe cognitive impairment and a history of stroke, had medication and lab orders entered under the wrong provider. Staff interviews indicated that the electronic medical record system did not have all prescribers listed, leading to incorrect entries, and there was a lack of communication about updating the provider list in the system.
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 9 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Cuba
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Pines Healthcare & Rehab Centers Olean Campus | 12.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Absolut Center For Nursing And Rehabilitation At A | 13.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| The Pines Healthcare & Rehab Ctrs Machias Campus | 15.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Houghton Rehabilitation & Nursing Center | 15.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Wellsville Manor Care Center | 17.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Cuba Memorial Hospital Inc Snf.
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 August 2026) and official state health department websites.