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 Waterview Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple medical conditions and intact cognition repeatedly expressed a preference not to receive care from a specific CNA due to concerns about being handled too roughly. Despite filing a grievance and informing facility leadership, the resident's care plan was not updated to reflect this preference, and the CNA continued to provide care, including after the resident refused. Staff interviews confirmed the preference was known but not documented or communicated in the care plan.
A resident with intact cognition and total care needs was awakened by two CNAs for incontinence care, refused the care, but the CNAs proceeded despite the refusal. The resident reported being upset and mishandled, and had previously requested not to be cared for by one of the CNAs involved. Facility policy required staff to respect refusals and notify a nurse or supervisor, but this was not followed.
A resident with multiple medical conditions reported being manhandled and receiving incontinence care against their wishes by two CNAs. The incident was reported by the family to the administrator, but the facility did not notify the State Survey Agency within the required timeframe, as mandated by regulations, instead opting to conduct an internal investigation.
The facility failed to complete MDS assessments for three residents within the required timeframe due to the absence of the Rehabilitation Director, leading to incomplete section GG. The Director of MDS and the Administrator were aware of the issue, but it resulted in non-compliance.
A resident with multiple diagnoses, including osteoarthritis, was observed poorly positioned during meals, leaning to the left side without assistance or positioning devices. Despite staff awareness of the issue, no referrals for occupational therapy were made since June, leading to a deficiency in care for maintaining or improving the resident's range of motion.
A resident with chronic respiratory conditions did not receive proper oxygen therapy monitoring and equipment maintenance as per facility policy. The oxygen order was not documented in the Treatment Administration Record, and the oxygen tubing was not changed or signed off as required. An LPN acknowledged the oversight, and a Registered Nurse Unit Manager updated the records to include the necessary oxygen order.
The facility did not adhere to professional food safety standards, as undated and unexpired food items were found in storage areas. Despite a policy requiring all food to be dated and labeled, surveyors observed several undated items in the freezer, refrigerator, and dry storage. The Food Services Director acknowledged the issue but could not explain the staff's non-compliance.
The facility did not update its Water Management Plan since 2019, leading to a deficiency in its Infection Prevention and Control Program. The Director of Engineering acknowledged the lapse in updating the plan, while the DON was unsure of their role in managing Legionella risks. The Administrator stressed the importance of the plan and role clarity among staff.
Failure to Honor Resident's Care Preferences and Dignity
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's right to self-determination and dignity by not supporting their expressed preference to avoid care from a specific Certified Nurse Aide (CNA). The resident, who had intact cognition and required total assistance with activities of daily living due to multiple medical diagnoses, filed a grievance in January 2025 stating that some CNAs, particularly one, were too strong and manhandled them, causing discomfort due to sensitive legs. Despite this grievance and repeated verbal complaints to facility leadership, there was no documented evidence that the resident's care plan was updated to reflect their preference to not receive care from the identified CNA. The CNA in question subsequently provided care to the resident, waking them early in the morning and performing care after the resident refused, which the resident again described as manhandling. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Nursing (DON), Administrator, and Director of Social Services, confirmed awareness of the resident's complaints and preference. However, the DON admitted that instructions to avoid assigning the CNA to the resident were given verbally and not documented in the care plan or communicated through the Kardex Care Guide. The facility's policy required care to be provided with resident consent and according to the care plan, but the lack of documentation and communication led to the resident's preferences not being honored, resulting in the deficiency.
Resident's Refusal of Care Not Honored by CNAs
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident, who had intact cognition and required total assistance with bathing, bed mobility, and toileting, was awakened early in the morning by two Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) to provide personal hygiene care. The resident refused care, expressing a desire to continue sleeping, but the CNAs proceeded to provide incontinence care despite the resident's refusal. The resident reported being upset by the interruption and felt mishandled during the care, subsequently informing their family representative of the incident. The facility's policies on abuse prevention and resident rights state that all residents have the right to be free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, and to make choices about aspects of their life in the facility. Despite these policies, both CNAs involved acknowledged that the resident refused care and was visibly upset, but they continued with the care due to concerns about skin breakdown from incontinence. The CNAs did not alert a nurse or supervisor as required when a resident refuses care, nor did they document the refusal at the time of the incident. Interviews with facility staff and the resident's family representative revealed that the resident had previously complained about being handled roughly by one of the CNAs and had requested not to receive care from that aide. The Director of Nursing confirmed that staff are instructed not to provide care if a resident refuses and to report such refusals. However, the CNA in question was still assigned to the resident, and the care was provided against the resident's wishes, leading to the reported deficiency.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Abuse to State Agency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment were reported immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation was made, to the State Survey Agency as required by federal and state regulations. Specifically, a resident with a history of atrial fibrillation, deep vein thrombosis, and rhabdomyolysis reported to their family that two certified nurse aides entered their room early in the morning and insisted on providing incontinence care despite the resident's refusal, and the resident felt they were manhandled during the process. The family relayed this complaint to the facility administrator, who initiated an internal investigation and interviewed the involved staff and resident. Despite the facility's policy requiring immediate reporting of such allegations to the Department of Health, the incident was not reported to the State Survey Agency. The Director of Nursing and the Administrator both acknowledged that the incident was not reported, with the Administrator stating that they chose to conduct their own investigation and did not believe the incident constituted abuse. The failure to report the allegation as required constituted a deficiency in the facility's abuse prevention and reporting procedures.
Failure to Complete MDS Assessments Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for residents were completed at least once every three months, as required. This deficiency was identified during a recertification survey conducted from October 3 to October 10, 2024. Specifically, the MDS assessments for three residents were not completed within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date. Resident #11 had an Assessment Reference Date of August 6, 2024, but the completion date was October 1, 2024, which was 8 weeks late. Similarly, Resident #14's assessment was completed 6 weeks late, and Resident #23's assessment was completed 10 weeks late. The delay in completing the MDS assessments was attributed to the absence of the Rehabilitation Director, which resulted in section GG of the assessments being incomplete. The Director of MDS acknowledged the issue and stated that the Administrator and the Interdisciplinary Team were aware of the situation. The Administrator confirmed awareness of the issue with section GG and mentioned that there was a transmission issue, but they did not realize it resulted in non-compliance.
Deficiency in Resident Positioning and Range of Motion Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services to maintain or improve the range of motion for a resident, identified as Resident #16, who was observed to be poorly positioned during meals. Resident #16, who has diagnoses including diabetes, non-Alzheimer's dementia, and osteoarthritis of the right shoulder, was seen leaning to the left side with their armpit resting on the wheelchair armrest while attempting to eat. The resident's care plan did not include interventions for proper body, head, and neck positioning, and there were no positioning devices in use. Staff did not assist the resident in repositioning during meal observations, and the resident was not receiving occupational therapy services at the time of the survey. Interviews with staff revealed that the resident had not been referred for occupational therapy since June 2024, despite observations of the resident leaning to the left side. Certified Nurse Aide #12 and Registered Nurse #2 acknowledged the resident's leaning and discomfort but did not make a referral for further evaluation. The Occupational Therapy Supervisor confirmed that no referrals had been made and noted that improper positioning could lead to negative outcomes such as feeding difficulties, pain, and pressure sores. The lack of appropriate interventions and referrals contributed to the deficiency in care for Resident #16.
Deficiency in Respiratory Care for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care for a resident, specifically in the administration and monitoring of oxygen therapy. Resident #312, who had diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and heart failure, was admitted to the facility with an order for continuous oxygen therapy at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula. However, there was no documented evidence in the Treatment Administration Record that the oxygen therapy was being administered or monitored as per the physician's order. Additionally, the facility's policy required the oxygen tubing to be changed weekly and documented, but observations revealed that the tubing was undated and unsigned, indicating non-compliance with the policy. During interviews, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) acknowledged that the oxygen order had not been transcribed to the Treatment Administration Record and needed updating. The LPN also admitted uncertainty about whether the oxygen tubing had been changed as required. A Registered Nurse Unit Manager later confirmed that the Treatment Administration Record had been updated to include the oxygen order. These lapses in documentation and adherence to facility policy resulted in a deficiency in providing safe and appropriate respiratory care for the resident.
Food Storage Deficiency Due to Lack of Proper Labeling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food safety, as observed during a recertification survey. Specifically, undated and unexpired food items were found in the walk-in freezer and refrigerator. The facility's policy, effective since 2018 and reviewed in 2024, requires each food item to be dated and labeled, with opened items wrapped, labeled, and dated from the initial date of use. During an initial kitchen tour, surveyors observed a bag of frozen pork butt without an expiration date, open bags of hash brown patties and French fries without dates, and various undated opened packs of cheese and other food items in the refrigerator. Additionally, the dry storage room contained undated opened bags of egg noodles, breadcrumbs, and cake mix. The Food Services Director acknowledged the requirement for dating and labeling but could not explain the staff's failure to comply, stating that all undated items would be discarded.
Outdated Water Management Plan and Unclear Roles in Legionella Control
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly establish and maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program, specifically by not updating the Water Management Plan since December 16, 2019. During a review of the Legionella Assessment and Water Management Plan, it was found that the plan was outdated, with the names of the current Administrator and Director of Nursing handwritten over white-out from the previous holders of these positions. The Director of Engineering admitted responsibility for updating the plan annually but acknowledged it had not been done in the last year. The Director of Nursing was unsure of their role in the Water Management Plan and did not know the steps to take if Legionella was identified in water samples, expressing reliance on guidance from the Department of Health. The Administrator recognized the importance of the Water Management Plan in controlling Legionella and emphasized the need for all involved parties to understand their roles.
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 431 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 Purdy Station
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salem Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Center | 0 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| The Paramount At Somers Rehab And Nursing Center | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 21 | 1 |
| Putnam Ridge | 8.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Laurel Ridge Center For Health & Rehabilitation | 9.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Northern Westchester Hospital T C U | 9.8 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Waterview Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing 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.