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 Carecore At Gaymont during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A facility failed to implement a comprehensive nutritional program for a resident with significant weight loss and multiple medical conditions, resulting in a severe weight loss of 17.6% within 21 days. Despite recommendations for nutritional supplements, the interventions were not implemented timely, leading to further deterioration of the resident's health.
The facility failed to ensure resident rooms were timely cleaned and maintained in good repair, affecting four residents. Issues included frayed call light cords, broken window shades, and stained floors. Despite being reported, these problems persisted, indicating a lapse in adhering to housekeeping and maintenance policies.
The facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach of residents, affecting two residents. One resident with multiple medical conditions was observed twice without access to her call light, and another resident with a history of stroke and other conditions was found with her call light on the floor. Staff confirmed the call lights were not accessible during these observations.
A resident with chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and systolic heart failure, who preferred morning showers on Wednesdays and Saturdays, received bed baths on two occasions without documented refusal or preference. The DON was unaware of the reason for this deviation, despite the facility's policy emphasizing respect for resident self-determination.
The facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was consistent throughout the medical record, with discrepancies found between the electronic medical record and the paper chart. An LPN confirmed the inconsistency, which contradicted the facility's policy on advance directives.
The facility failed to provide appropriate pressure ulcer prevention interventions for a resident with a stage III pressure ulcer. Despite recommendations and the presence of an alternating air mattress, the resident was observed without pressure relief devices in their wheelchair and recliner. The facility also lacked written protocols for pressure reduction measures.
The facility failed to ensure residents receiving supplemental oxygen had complete physician's orders, affecting three residents. One resident with COPD and lung cancer had no oxygen order upon readmission, another had an incomplete order leading to confusion, and a third used oxygen intermittently without a formal order until shortly before discharge.
The facility failed to comply with binding arbitration agreement requirements by not allowing residents up to 30 days to rescind the agreement and not providing an option for a neutral arbitrator. This affected three residents, and the contact information for the arbitration firm listed on the forms was outdated and incorrect.
Failure to Implement Nutritional Program Leads to Severe Weight Loss
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, effective, and individualized nutritional program for Resident #122, who was admitted with significant unplanned weight loss and tested positive for COVID-19 shortly after admission. Despite the dietitian's recommendation on 04/09/24 for a frozen nutritional treat twice a day, this intervention was not implemented until 04/23/24. During this period, Resident #122 experienced a severe weight loss of 17.6% within 21 days, dropping from 75 pounds to 61.8 pounds. The dietitian's progress notes did not address the severe weight loss or recommend new interventions in a timely manner, and there was no evidence that the initial nutritional recommendations were followed until much later. Upon admission, Resident #122 had multiple medical diagnoses, including stroke, protein-calorie malnutrition, anemia, and COPD. The resident's BMI was 15.6, indicating underweight status, and she had a stage III pressure ulcer. Despite these critical health indicators, the facility did not ensure that the recommended nutritional supplements were provided promptly. The dietitian confirmed that she could not enter physician's orders into the medical record and relied on nursing staff to do so, which did not happen in a timely manner. Interviews and observations revealed that the resident did not receive the recommended frozen nutritional treat until 04/23/24, and by 04/25/24, the resident's weight had further decreased to 61.8 pounds. The facility's policy on weight assessment and interventions was not effectively followed, leading to significant harm to Resident #122 due to severe weight loss and inadequate nutritional support. The failure to implement timely nutritional interventions and monitor the resident's weight effectively contributed to the resident's deteriorating condition.
Failure to Maintain Clean and Safe Resident Rooms
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure resident rooms were timely cleaned and maintained in good repair, affecting four of six residents reviewed for environment. Resident #11 had a frayed call light cord, a broken window shade, and stained tile floors. Despite the issues being reported to staff, the problems persisted upon re-observation. Resident #53 had a dried milk spill on the floor and a broken window shade, which were not addressed even after the resident reported the spill to a nursing assistant. The dried spill was later covered with wash cloths, but the window shade remained broken. Resident #38's room had a broken window shade since admission, which was confirmed by both the resident's family member and the Laundry and Housekeeping Supervisor (LHS). Resident #21 also had a broken window shade that had been reported to maintenance but remained unfixed for a long time. Interviews with staff and residents confirmed the deficiencies, and policy reviews revealed that housekeeping surfaces should be cleaned regularly and when visibly soiled, and maintenance personnel are responsible for keeping the building in good repair. The facility census was 70, and the deficiencies were observed and verified by multiple staff members, including a State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) and the LHS. The facility's failure to maintain a clean and safe environment for residents was evident in the repeated observations and interviews, highlighting a significant lapse in adhering to their own policies and procedures.
Failure to Ensure Call Lights Were Within Reach of Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach of residents, affecting two residents out of 19 reviewed. Resident #51, who has end-stage renal disease, cerebral infarction, anxiety, and depression, was observed twice without access to her call light. On one occasion, the call light was wrapped around the mobility bar on the bed, and on another, it was underneath blankets on the bed. Both times, the resident expressed a need for assistance but was unable to call for help due to the call light being out of reach. Staff interviews confirmed the call light was not accessible to the resident during these observations. Resident #122, who has a history of stroke, protein-calorie malnutrition, anemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was also found without access to her call light. The resident was observed lying on her left side, facing the window, and stated that the call light was on the floor and she needed to use the bathroom. The call light was confirmed to be on the floor by a staff member, who then assisted the resident. The facility's policy on answering call lights, dated September 2022, requires that call lights be accessible to residents, which was not adhered to in these instances.
Failure to Honor Resident's Shower Preference
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's preference for showers, affecting one resident with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and systolic heart failure. The resident, who had intact cognition and was dependent on staff for bathing, preferred showers in the mornings on Wednesdays and Saturdays. However, the resident received bed baths on two occasions without any documented refusal or preference for a bed bath. The Director of Nursing was unaware of the reason for this deviation from the resident's preference. The facility's policy on Resident Rights emphasized treating residents with kindness, respect, and dignity, and supporting their right to self-determination.
Inconsistent Code Status Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was consistent throughout the medical record. This affected one resident who had a diagnosis of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, hypertension, type two diabetes mellitus, and peripheral vascular disease. The resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated intact cognition, and the plan of care specified a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care-Arrest (DNRCC-A) status. However, the electronic medical record face sheet and physician's orders listed the resident with a full code status, which contradicted the paper chart that had a signed DNRCC-A order. During an interview, an LPN confirmed the inconsistency between the electronic medical record and the paper medical record regarding the resident's code status. The facility's policy on advance directives stated that physician's orders should be consistent and updated with the resident's treatment preferences and/or advance directive. The failure to maintain consistent code status documentation across different parts of the medical record led to this deficiency.
Failure to Provide Pressure Ulcer Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident with a pressure ulcer was provided with appropriate pressure ulcer prevention interventions. Resident #122, who had medical diagnoses including stroke, protein calorie malnutrition, anemia, and COPD, was admitted with a stage III pressure ulcer on the coccyx. Despite the presence of a wound treatment order, there were no additional pressure ulcer prevention interventions documented in the admission physician orders. Observations revealed that Resident #122 was often seated in a wheelchair and a recliner without any pressure relief devices, and the alternating air mattress on the bed did not have specified settings according to the physician's order or manufacturer's instructions. Further review of the facility's wound evaluation notes and interviews with staff confirmed the lack of pressure relief devices in the resident's seating arrangements. The facility's Certified Wound Nurse had recommended several interventions, including a pressure reduction mattress, offloading heels, and a wheelchair pressure reduction cushion, but these were not implemented. Additionally, the facility was unable to provide written protocols for pressure reduction mattresses, offloading heels, wheelchair cushions, and nutritional consults when requested during the survey. The facility's policy on the prevention of pressure injuries was also reviewed, which emphasized the selection of appropriate support surfaces based on the resident's risk factors, but these guidelines were not followed in Resident #122's care.
Incomplete Physician's Orders for Oxygen Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure residents receiving supplemental oxygen had complete physician's orders for oxygen administration. This deficiency affected three residents who were reviewed for respiratory care. Resident #45, who had a history of COPD and lung cancer, was readmitted from the hospital with a need for supplemental oxygen. However, there was no physician's order for oxygen administration until several days after her readmission, despite the resident using oxygen continuously since her return to the facility. The oversight was confirmed by MDS Nurse #162, who acknowledged that the nurse responsible for the readmission had overlooked the need for an oxygen order. Resident #62, who had diagnoses including COPD and chronic respiratory failure, had an incomplete physician's order for oxygen. The order did not specify whether the oxygen was to be administered continuously or intermittently, leading to confusion for both the resident and the staff. Observations revealed that the resident was unsure about the proper use of her oxygen, and MDS Nurse #162 confirmed that the order lacked necessary details. Resident #224, who had COPD and was discharged home, also experienced a deficiency in oxygen administration orders. Although the resident had been using supplemental oxygen since admission, there was no physician's order until shortly before her discharge. MDS Nurse #162 verified that the resident had been using oxygen intermittently since admission without a formal order. The facility's policy on oxygen administration clearly stated that a physician's order was required, which was not adhered to in these cases.
Non-Compliance with Binding Arbitration Agreement Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with the requirements for binding arbitration agreements by not allowing residents up to 30 days to rescind the agreement and not providing an option for a neutral arbitrator. This affected three residents who had signed the facility's binding arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreements reviewed for these residents indicated that disputes would be resolved by a listed arbitration firm without mentioning the option for a neutral arbitrator and allowed only fourteen days to rescind the agreement. Additionally, the contact information for the arbitration firm listed on the forms was outdated and incorrect. Interviews with staff, including the Administrator and Receptionist, confirmed that the facility had been using the wrong form for binding arbitration agreements. The Receptionist was unaware of the regulatory requirement for a 30-day rescission period. The President of Clinical Services acknowledged the error and provided a copy of a new form that complied with federal regulations, allowing for the selection of a neutral arbitrator and a 30-day rescission period. The facility's policy on binding arbitration agreements, revised in November 2023, was also reviewed and confirmed to comply with federal regulations.
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 118 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 Norwalk
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Twilight Gardens Nursing And Rehabilitation | 0.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 0 |
| Norwalk Memorial Home | 0.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Vista Care Center Of Milan | 4 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Bellevue Care Center | 10.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Admirals Pointe Nursing & Rehabilitation | 12.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Carecore At Gaymont.
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.