Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around November 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 Glen Cove Center For Nursing And Rehabilitation during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Cold Meal Service and Inadequate Temperature Control: Residents repeatedly reported that hot meals were served cold, and an Ombudsman confirmed this was a recurring complaint across the facility. During meal observations, test tray temperatures on multiple units were below the required 135°F, with some items as low as 111°F. Staff interviews identified delays in tray delivery, shared meal trucks for room trays and dining room trays, and missing heated pellet bottoms for some trays.
Cold Resident Room Temperature: A resident with dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and malnutrition repeatedly complained of being cold while in bed during wound care preparation. An LPN and CNA noted the room was cold, and surveyors observed a draft coming through a gap above the wall AC unit; the room temperature was measured at 66 degrees and later 67 degrees, while the resident remained cold despite extra blankets.
Dirty Walk-In Freezer and Inadequate Sanitation Practices: The kitchen walk-in freezer was observed with food debris, a frozen brown substance on the floor, and a bag of frozen spinach wedged on the floor behind a shelf. The freezer was dimly lit and required a flashlight to inspect, and staff reported that the floor could not be fully cleaned with water and a regular cleaning agent because the debris was stuck to the surface. The cleaning log lacked required details on methods and cleaning compounds for the freezer task.
Failure to Follow Contact Precautions for a Resident with MRSA: A resident on Contact Isolation for MRSA of the nares was observed receiving breakfast when a CNA entered the room without hand hygiene and without the required gown and gloves, despite posted signage directing staff to clean hands and use PPE. The resident had positive MRSA cultures, physician orders for strict single-room Contact Precautions, and a care plan reflecting those precautions.
A resident with impaired cognition and a history of falls was observed twice with their call bell out of reach, contrary to facility policy. Staff interviews confirmed the call bell should have been accessible, but a CNA admitted to forgetting to place it within reach. The DON emphasized the importance of checking the call bell every two hours.
Two residents experienced environmental deficiencies in their rooms, with one having a stained privacy curtain and the other missing a window covering. Despite daily cleaning and maintenance routines, staff failed to notice and report these issues, leading to a failure in maintaining a clean and homelike environment.
A resident with a sacral pressure ulcer did not receive appropriate care due to an incorrect air mattress weight setting, which was not adjusted to match the resident's weight. The facility's staff were unclear about who was responsible for adjusting the setting, and the wound care team failed to classify the stage of the ulcer. The resident's wound showed signs of deterioration, and the issue was not addressed until maintenance staff intervened.
The facility did not post daily nursing staffing information accurately, as observed during a survey. Staffing sheets from May 13 to May 16, 2024, lacked details on the total number of licensed and unlicensed staff per shift. Interviews revealed confusion over responsibility for posting, with the Staffing Coordinator unsure of weekend duties and the DON noting a lapse by the night RN Supervisor.
A resident with Alzheimer's and a Psychotic Disorder did not receive a timely psychiatric consultation as required. Despite a physician's order for a consult shortly after admission, the evaluation was delayed beyond the facility's 14-day policy. The resident was on Quetiapine for Anxiety Disorder, but the diagnosis was questioned, and the medication regimen was maintained despite recommendations for reassessment. Interviews revealed the consult was pending, leading to a deficiency finding.
Cold Meal Service and Inadequate Temperature Control
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that residents were served food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature. During the Resident Council meeting on 12/12/2025, six of seven alert and lucid residents in attendance reported that hot meals were being served cold. The Ombudsman also stated that residents regularly complain about hot food being served cold throughout the facility, not just on one unit, and Resident Council minutes from 6/2025 through 10/2025 documented ongoing concerns about food temperatures. During lunch meal service observations on 12/16/2025, surveyors requested test trays from four units. On the Akahai Unit, the last tray was served at 12:10 PM and the test tray temperatures were 127 degrees Fahrenheit for roast beef, 123 degrees Fahrenheit for mashed potatoes, and 121 degrees Fahrenheit for green beans. On the [NAME] Unit, the last tray was served at 12:37 PM and temperatures were 125.4 degrees Fahrenheit for mashed potatoes and 120 degrees Fahrenheit for green beans. On the Olakino Unit, the last tray was served at 12:52 PM and temperatures were 129 degrees Fahrenheit for roast beef and 130.5 degrees Fahrenheit for green beans. On the Imua Unit, only 5 heated pellet bottoms were observed for approximately 18-20 resident trays, and the last tray served at 12:55 PM had temperatures of 124 degrees Fahrenheit for roast beef and 111 degrees Fahrenheit for green beans. Interviews identified factors contributing to the cold food service. A resident stated hot meals were often served cold because staff took a long time to deliver food to rooms, and another resident stated breakfast was not eaten because it was delivered cold. An LPN stated trays for residents eating in their rooms were on the same meal truck as dining room trays, with dining room residents served first, causing room trays to wait until dining room service was completed. The Food Service Director stated heated pellet bottoms were missing for some Imua trays and that all trays should have them, and also stated they were unaware that separate meal trucks were not being used for Akahai and [NAME] unit residents who ate in their rooms. The Administrator stated there should have been enough heated pellets for all resident meals and that dining room residents should have been served on a separate meal truck from residents eating in their rooms.
Cold Resident Room Temperature
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain comfortable temperature levels in a resident area, affecting one resident reviewed for the environmental task. Resident #2, who had diagnoses including non-Alzheimer's dementia, Parkinson's disease, and malnutrition, had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 6 on the 11/28/2025 admission MDS. On 12/15/2025, while staff were preparing to perform wound care, the resident complained of being cold and was observed in bed in a two-bedded room that felt cold. Licensed Practical Nurse #1 acknowledged the room was cold and said maintenance would be contacted after wound care was completed, while Certified Nursing Assistant #2 said they would get another blanket. Later that morning, the resident was still complaining of being cold, even with two blankets on. Survey observation identified a gap in the wall above the wall-mounted air conditioning unit with a cold draft entering the room, and the outdoor temperature was 28 degrees Fahrenheit. Maintenance Office Worker #1 measured the room at 66 degrees Fahrenheit and confirmed the draft from the gap above the air conditioner unit. During later observations, the room remained cold and the resident continued to complain of being cold. The Director of Engineering and Environmental Service #1 stated the heating unit was working properly and suggested the room may have been cooler because it was next to an unheated stairwell; the stairwell wall measured 63 degrees Fahrenheit. The resident's room temperature was later measured at 67 degrees Fahrenheit, and the Director stated they could not explain why the room was cold. The facility's daily air temperature log showed other rooms were checked at 71 to 77 degrees Fahrenheit, and Resident #2's room had last been checked at 71 degrees Fahrenheit on 12/12/2025. A progress note later documented the resident's room was changed because the resident complained it was cold.
Dirty Walk-In Freezer and Inadequate Sanitation Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper sanitation and food storage practices in the kitchen walk-in freezer. During the initial kitchen tour, the floor of the walk-in freezer was observed to be soiled with food debris and a frozen brownish substance, and a bag of frozen chopped spinach was found on the floor wedged behind the foot of a shelf and the corner of the freezer. On follow-up observation the next day, the floor remained dirty with the same unknown brown substance still stuck to the surface, and the bag of spinach was still in the same location. The facility’s sanitation policy required a written cleaning schedule with defined frequency, methods, and cleaning compounds for each task, and staff initials and dates documenting completion. The Kitchen Daily Cleaning Log showed daily cleaning of the walk-in freezer was assigned to an area, but it did not include the method or materials/cleaning compounds to be used for cleaning and sanitizing. The log was signed by a staff member for several days before the survey, indicating daily cleaning of the walk-in freezer. During interviews, the Director of Food Services and the Food Services Supervisor acknowledged the freezer was dimly lit and required a flashlight to inspect. The Director of Food Services stated a staff member had been assigned to clean the freezer, but the floor still could not be thoroughly cleaned with water and a regular cleaning agent because the debris was stuck to the floor. The Director also stated the freezer should be clean and free of debris, and that staff who could not perform a thorough cleaning should notify a supervisor. A staff member responsible for stocking and cleaning stated the freezer was cleaned on a regular schedule but had not reported the poor lighting to supervision.
Failure to Follow Contact Precautions for Resident with MRSA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This deficiency involved one resident who was on Contact Isolation precautions for MRSA of the nares. The resident had been admitted with sepsis, pulmonary embolism, and atrial fibrillation, had intact cognition on the Annual MDS, and also had a history of asthma, COPD, or chronic lung disease. A nose culture collected before admission showed MRSA in the nares, and a follow-up culture remained positive. Physician orders directed strict single-room isolation with Contact Precautions and mupirocin to both nostrils, and the care plan included isolation precautions as ordered and maintaining them at all times. During a breakfast meal observation, a Contact Precautions sign outside the resident’s room instructed staff to clean their hands before and after entering and when leaving the room, and to wear a gown and gloves. A CNA was observed entering the room to deliver the breakfast tray without wearing a gown or gloves and without performing hand hygiene before entry. In interview, the CNA stated they were in a hurry and did not see the signage. The unit manager, infection preventionist, and DON each stated that staff should have followed the posted precautions, including hand hygiene and wearing the required PPE before entering the room.
Resident Call Bell Accessibility Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident had access to a call bell to alert staff of their needs, as observed during a recertification survey. This deficiency was identified for a resident with a history of cerebral infarction, dementia, and falls, who required partial assistance for bed mobility and transfers. On two separate occasions, the resident was observed in bed with the call bell out of reach, hanging over the top knob of their nightstand. The resident, who had severely impaired cognition, was unable to reach the call bell and was unaware of its usual placement. Interviews with staff, including a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), and the Director of Nursing Services (DON), confirmed that the call bell should have been within the resident's reach. The CNA admitted to forgetting to place the call bell next to the resident after providing care. Both the LPN and the DON emphasized the importance of ensuring the call bell is accessible to residents, with the DON stating that the call bell should be checked every two hours and as needed. The facility's policy required call lights to be placed within reach of residents, which was not adhered to in this instance.
Environmental Deficiencies in Resident Rooms
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for two residents, as observed during a recertification survey. Resident #24's room had a privacy curtain with numerous large stains, which had been present since their admission approximately three weeks prior. Despite daily cleaning routines, the stained curtain went unnoticed by the staff, including a Certified Nursing Assistant, a Registered Nurse, and a Housekeeper, who all stated they did not observe the issue. The maintenance logs did not document any concerns related to the stained curtain, and the Maintenance Mechanic was unaware of the issue until it was brought to their attention during the survey. Resident #80's room was found to be missing a window covering for one of its two windows. This deficiency was not documented in the maintenance logs, and staff members, including a Certified Nursing Assistant, a Licensed Practical Nurse, and a Registered Nurse, failed to notice the missing window covering during their regular interactions with the resident. The Maintenance Mechanic and Housekeeper were also unaware of the missing window covering, and the issue was not reported through the usual channels. Interviews with the Director of Engineering and Environmental Services and the Administrator revealed that the facility's expectations were for staff to observe and report such deficiencies during their daily rounds. However, the lack of documentation and awareness among the staff led to these environmental deficiencies going unaddressed, compromising the residents' right to a safe, clean, and homelike environment.
Failure to Provide Appropriate Pressure Ulcer Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice. Specifically, a resident admitted with a Deep Tissue Injury to the sacrum had a physician's order for an alternating pressure relief air mattress, but the weight setting on the mattress was not accurately set according to the resident's weight. Observations revealed that the mattress was set at 230 pounds, while the resident's actual weight was 108.3 pounds. This discrepancy was not addressed by the nursing staff, who were unsure of who was responsible for adjusting the weight setting. The facility's policy required weekly evaluations of pressure sites for treatment effectiveness, but the resident's sacral wound was not properly classified by the Director of Nursing Services and the Wound Physician. The wound care team did not classify the stage of the pressure ulcer, and the wound was observed to have deteriorated to a full-thickness wound with granulation tissue and slough present. Despite the presence of a physician's order to check the air mattress for proper functioning every shift, the weight setting remained incorrect until it was adjusted by the Director of Maintenance. Interviews with nursing staff revealed a lack of clarity regarding the responsibility for adjusting the air mattress settings. The wound care nurse did not recall checking the mattress weight setting during wound rounds, and the charge nurse was unable to adjust the setting without assistance from maintenance staff. The Director of Nursing Services acknowledged the incorrect weight setting and the need for it to match the resident's weight to promote wound healing. The Wound Physician's progress note did not classify the staging of the sacral pressure ulcer, and attempts to re-interview the physician were unsuccessful.
Failure to Post Accurate Daily Nursing Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that nursing staffing information was posted daily and accurately, as required during the Recertification Survey conducted from May 13 to May 17, 2024. On May 13, 2024, the nursing staffing sheet displayed in the facility's entrance lobby was dated May 10, 2024, and did not include the total number of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff working per shift. This issue persisted from May 13 to May 16, 2024, with the posted sheets lacking the necessary details for each shift, including the 7:00 AM-3:00 PM, 3:00 PM-11:00 PM, and 11:00 PM-7:00 AM shifts. Interviews revealed a lack of clarity and communication regarding the responsibility for posting the staffing sheets. The Staffing Coordinator, interviewed on May 16, 2024, stated they were responsible for posting the sheets on their working days but were unsure who handled this task on weekends or their days off. The Director of Nursing Services, interviewed on May 17, 2024, indicated that the night Registered Nurse Supervisor was responsible for posting the information daily, including weekends. However, the Registered Nurse Supervisor forgot to post the staffing information over the weekend of May 11 and 12, 2024. The Director of Nursing Services acknowledged the omission of total nursing staff numbers on the sheets and expressed an intention to revise the process.
Delayed Psychiatric Consultation for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident received timely psychiatric consultation services as required. Resident #91, who was admitted with Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, and a Psychotic Disorder, had a physician's order for an initial psychiatry consult dated 4/2/2024. However, the resident did not receive this consult until 5/15/2024, well beyond the expected timeframe. The facility's policy mandates that such consultations should occur within 14 days of admission, but this was not adhered to in this case. The resident was prescribed Quetiapine, an antipsychotic medication, upon admission for an Anxiety Disorder, but the diagnosis was later questioned by the pharmacist. The pharmacist recommended a psychosocial and medical work-up to assess the underlying causes of the resident's behaviors, suggesting a potential tapering or discontinuation of the medication if no significant behaviors were identified. Despite these recommendations, the primary physician disagreed with the pharmacist's suggestions and maintained the current medication regimen, citing the resident's aggressive behavior. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Nursing Services and the psychiatrist, revealed that the psychiatry consult was pending and had not been conducted within the expected timeframe. The psychiatrist confirmed that they had not seen the resident until prompted by the facility on 5/15/2024. The delay in obtaining the psychiatric evaluation resulted in a lack of timely assessment and management of the resident's psychiatric needs, which was a deficiency identified during the survey.
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 934 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 16 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 Glen Cove
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emerge Nursing And Rehabilitation At Glen Cove | 0 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Glengariff Health Care Center | 0.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 0 |
| The Amsterdam At Harborside | 3.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Sands Point Center For Health And Rehabilitation | 4.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| Sunharbor Manor | 5.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Glen Cove Center For Nursing And Rehabilitation.
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.