Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Westchester House, The during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility did not consistently safeguard or document residents' personal belongings, resulting in missing items such as clothing, jewelry, wallets, and cash for several residents. Inventory sheets were incomplete or missing, and staff interviews revealed inconsistent practices in handling and recording personal property, despite facility policies requiring thorough documentation and efforts to prevent loss or theft.
A resident with multiple comorbidities and a history of wounds did not receive required weekly skin assessments, and a new wound caused by cellulitis was not identified, documented, or reported to the physician for new treatment orders. Outdated wound care orders were not discontinued, and inaccurate documentation was made in the TAR, resulting in confusion and failure to follow facility policy.
The facility failed to complete weekly skin assessments and did not promptly identify, document, or notify the physician about new and existing pressure ulcers for two residents. One resident's new Stage II pressure ulcer was not recognized or reported in a timely manner, and another was admitted with pressure ulcers that were not measured or treated according to hospital discharge instructions. Staff did not follow facility policy for wound assessment and notification, resulting in delayed care.
A facility failed to provide adequate mealtime assistance and nutritional support, leading to significant weight loss in three residents. One resident experienced a 9.43% weight loss due to lack of assistance with meals, while another resident's physician was not notified of a 6.34% weight loss, and dietary recommendations were not implemented. A third resident did not receive prescribed double portions and fortified shakes, contributing to weight loss. Observations and interviews revealed a lack of communication and follow-through on dietary needs.
The facility failed to provide meals at a safe and appetizing temperature, affecting several residents. Observations showed food temperatures below the safe range, and residents reported receiving cold and unappetizing meals. The Dietary Manager and Administrator acknowledged the issue, emphasizing the need for timely and palatable meal service.
The facility failed to involve residents or their responsible parties in care planning, affecting six residents. Despite policy requirements, several residents and their representatives were not invited to participate in care plan meetings, and there was no documentation of such meetings in their records. The Social Services Director admitted to not holding care plan meetings for long-term residents, and the MDS coordinator confirmed inconsistency in scheduling these meetings.
The facility failed to notify families of room changes for three residents who tested positive for COVID-19. Despite the facility's policy, there was no documentation that families were informed when residents were moved off the isolation unit. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistencies in the notification process, with different expectations for who should inform families.
The facility failed to maintain complete and individualized care plans for three residents, omitting critical information such as the use of catheters, bed rails, and mental health evaluations. Observations confirmed the use of these devices, yet they were not documented in the care plans. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in updating care plans, leading to deficiencies in addressing residents' specific needs.
The facility failed to provide adequate assistance with ADLs for three residents, leading to deficiencies in personal care. One resident with Parkinsonism was left in a soiled gown and bed sheets without meal assistance. Another resident was found soaked in urine due to lack of regular checks. A third resident with contracted hands struggled to eat without help, despite recommendations for staff assistance. The facility's administrator and DON acknowledged these failures.
The facility failed to provide an ongoing activity program based on resident preferences, leading to dissatisfaction among residents. Observations and interviews revealed that no activities were taking place, and residents were confined to their rooms due to a COVID outbreak. Despite care plans indicating the need for in-room activities, these were not provided. Staff confirmed that activities had been suspended, and the Administrator and DON acknowledged that activities should have continued and been documented.
The facility failed to follow physicians' orders for respiratory evaluations for five residents diagnosed with COVID-19, resulting in numerous missed assessments. Despite care plans emphasizing the need for ongoing respiratory monitoring to prevent complications, the facility did not consistently complete these evaluations. Interviews with staff confirmed the expectation for assessments every shift, but significant gaps were found in adherence to these protocols.
A long-term care facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below 5%, resulting in a 12.12% error rate. Errors included improper insulin administration and incorrect medication dosages. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in following medication administration policies, contributing to the high error rate.
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as staff did not wear appropriate PPE during high-contact activities with residents on enhanced barrier precautions. Observations showed non-compliance with gown and glove use, improper perineal care techniques, and failure to follow TB testing protocols for employees. These deficiencies were noted in the care of multiple residents and among staff, indicating a lack of adherence to facility policies.
The facility failed to complete discharge summaries for two residents, one with heart and kidney failure and another with quadriplegia and cognitive deficits. Despite documentation of discharge processes, the medical records lacked summaries recapping their stays and final statuses. Staff interviews indicated a lack of recollection or documentation of these summaries.
A resident with an arterial ischemic ulcer did not receive wound care as ordered, resulting in a dirty and unchanged dressing. Despite the care plan's directives, the resident reported that the dressing was not changed over the weekend, and staff interviews confirmed that the assigned nurse was responsible for wound care in the absence of the wound nurse. The facility's administrator expected adherence to wound treatment orders and policies.
A resident with multiple diagnoses, including calciphylaxis and end-stage renal disease, did not receive consistent wound care as per physician orders. The facility's failure to adhere to the care plan resulted in missed treatments and inadequate management of the resident's pressure ulcer and other wounds. Observations and staff interviews confirmed that dressings were not changed as required, and there was significant drainage from the wounds.
Failure to Safeguard and Document Residents' Personal Possessions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the safety and proper documentation of residents' personal possessions, as required by its own policies. For four sampled residents, inventory sheets were either incomplete or missing, and there was no consistent documentation of personal belongings upon admission or when new items were brought in. The facility's policies required the laundry department and nursing staff to mark and account for each item of clothing and personal property, but these procedures were not reliably followed. In several cases, there was no record of valuable items such as a faux fur blanket, makeup bags, perfume, an electric toothbrush, a gold wedding band, wallets, or cash, despite residents or their families reporting these items as missing. One resident, who was cognitively intact and dependent on staff for transfers, reported missing $700 worth of personal belongings, including a faux fur blanket that was taken to the laundry and not returned. The resident felt the facility was not taking the loss seriously and had not provided updates. Another resident, also cognitively intact and newly admitted to hospice, was reported by staff and family to have been wearing a gold wedding band, which was missing after the resident's death. Staff searched for the ring but could not locate it, and there was no documentation of the ring on the inventory sheet or in progress notes. Additional deficiencies included a resident with moderate cognitive impairment who reported a missing wallet with cash, and another resident who reported missing $100 from a wallet, despite refusing to keep money in the resident trust account. In both cases, inventory sheets did not accurately reflect the presence or loss of these items, and there was no documentation in progress notes regarding the missing property. Interviews with staff and administration revealed inconsistent practices and a lack of clarity regarding responsibility for maintaining and updating inventory records, as well as for ensuring the security of residents' personal property.
Failure to Complete Skin Assessments and Notify Physician of New Wound
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete weekly skin assessments and did not identify or document an open wound caused by cellulitis on a resident. There was no documentation of weekly skin integrity data collection assessments for over a month, and the facility did not notify the resident's physician or obtain new orders for wound care when a new wound was discovered on the resident's left posterior thigh. The wound was not assessed or documented in the medical record, and the responsible party and Director of Nursing were not notified as required by facility policy. The resident involved had multiple medical conditions, including heart failure, kidney disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus, and was dependent on staff for most activities of daily living. The resident had a history of multiple wounds, including a significant wound on the right thigh, and was at high risk for skin breakdown. Despite these risks, the facility did not ensure that weekly skin assessments were completed or that new wounds were promptly identified, assessed, and communicated to the physician for appropriate treatment orders. Additionally, the facility failed to discontinue outdated wound care orders and documented inaccurately in the Treatment Administration Record (TAR), showing treatments as administered under multiple, conflicting orders. This resulted in false documentation and confusion regarding which wound care orders were current. The wound nurse acknowledged not discontinuing previous orders and not documenting the new wound or notifying the physician in a timely manner, contrary to facility policy and expectations.
Failure to Complete Skin Assessments and Timely Wound Care Notification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete weekly skin assessments and to identify and document a Stage II pressure ulcer for one resident, as well as failed to notify the physician and obtain treatment orders for the wound. The resident, who was cognitively intact but dependent on staff for activities of daily living and incontinent of bowel and bladder, was at risk for pressure ulcers and had multiple comorbidities including heart failure, kidney disease, respiratory disease, and diabetes. There was no documentation of weekly skin integrity assessments for over a month, and new open areas on the resident's left buttock were not identified or reported until observed by the wound nurse. The wound nurse did not notify the physician, the resident's responsible party, or the DON of the new wounds, nor did she document a wound assessment or obtain new treatment orders in a timely manner. Another resident was admitted with existing pressure ulcers to the sacrum, gluteal area, and bilateral heels, but there was no documentation of wound measurements or treatment orders for these areas upon admission. The progress notes and medication records did not reflect any treatment orders for the pressure ulcers until several days after admission, despite the presence of hospital discharge orders for wound care. The wound nurse and DON confirmed that staff did not notify them of the wounds upon admission, and the wounds were only addressed after management reviewed hospital paperwork and initiated a skin assessment. Interviews with staff revealed that CNAs and nurses were expected to report and document new skin issues immediately, but this did not occur in either case. The facility's policies required comprehensive skin assessments on admission and weekly thereafter, as well as prompt notification of the physician and responsible parties when new wounds were identified. These procedures were not followed, resulting in delayed identification, documentation, and treatment of pressure ulcers for both residents.
Failure to Provide Adequate Nutritional Support and Mealtime Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate mealtime assistance to a resident, resulting in a significant weight loss of 9.43% within a 30-day period. The resident, who was cognitively intact and required partial assistance with eating, was observed multiple times lying in bed with an untouched meal tray. Despite the resident's inability to feed themselves due to hand tremors, staff did not assist with meals, leading to the resident only eating when family members visited. The resident's spouse confirmed that staff did not set up the meal tray or feed the resident, and a handwritten sign requesting assistance was placed in the resident's room. Another resident experienced a 6.34% weight loss over three months, and the facility failed to notify the physician and implement the Registered Dietician's (RD) recommendation to increase a nutritional supplement from twice to three times daily. The resident, who had diagnoses including heart failure and diabetes, was not provided with the recommended increased supplement intake, as there was no documentation of a physician's order for the change. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of communication and follow-through on dietary recommendations. A third resident, at risk for weight loss, did not receive the prescribed double portions and fortified shakes. Despite being on a regular diet with double portions and fortified foods, the resident's meal tickets did not reflect these orders, and the resident reported not receiving the fortified shakes. Observations confirmed that the resident's meals did not include double portions, and the Dietary Manager admitted that health shakes were not consistently distributed. The RD expected the resident to receive the prescribed nutritional support, but this was not implemented, contributing to the resident's weight loss.
Failure to Serve Palatable and Safe Temperature Meals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide residents with food that was palatable and at a safe and appetizing temperature, affecting 7 out of 18 sampled residents. Observations and interviews revealed that residents consistently received meals that were cold and unappetizing. For instance, Resident #80, with moderate cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including heart failure and malnutrition, reported that lunch was terrible and always served cold. Similarly, Resident #38, who is cognitively intact, stated that meals served in resident rooms were always cold, prompting family members to bring food during visits. Other residents, such as Resident #292 and Resident #81, also expressed dissatisfaction with the temperature and quality of the food served. During meal service observations, food temperatures were recorded well below the safe and appetizing range. For example, on the 200 Hall, sliced ham was measured at 87°F, scrambled eggs at 88.7°F, and hashbrowns at 89°F. On the 500 unit, scrambled eggs were at 108.5°F, sliced ham at 93.0°F, and oatmeal at 92.1°F. The Dietary Manager acknowledged that staff should ensure food is served on time and not cold, while the Administrator confirmed that hot foods should be served hot and cold foods cold, emphasizing the need for timely and palatable meal service.
Failure to Involve Residents in Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents or their responsible parties were invited to participate in the development and implementation of person-centered care plans. This deficiency was identified for six out of eighteen sampled residents, despite the facility's policy requiring resident and representative involvement in care planning. The policy mandates that care plans be reviewed and revised by an interdisciplinary team with knowledge of the resident's needs, and that residents and their representatives be given advance notice of care planning conferences. Interviews and record reviews revealed that several residents and their responsible parties were not contacted or invited to participate in care plan meetings. For instance, a resident's responsible party reported not being contacted for a care plan meeting since the resident's admission. Another resident, who was their own responsible party, stated they had not participated in a care plan meeting and were unaware of the facility's plan for them. Similar issues were noted for other residents, with no documentation of care plan meetings or notifications in their medical records. The Social Services Director (SSD) admitted to not holding care plan meetings for long-term residents, while the MDS coordinator confirmed that care plan meetings had not been consistent. The Administrator and Director of Nursing expected care plan meetings to be held quarterly and as needed, with notifications sent to residents and responsible parties. However, this expectation was not met, leading to the deficiency.
Failure to Notify Families of Room Changes for COVID-19 Positive Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility staff failed to notify the family or resident representatives in a timely manner regarding the change of room assignments for three residents who tested positive for COVID-19. The facility's COVID-19 policy did not include a requirement for notifying the residents' representatives about room changes. Resident #62, who was cognitively intact and diagnosed with heart disease, kidney failure, anxiety, and depression, was moved off the isolation unit without the family being informed. Similarly, Resident #31, also cognitively intact and diagnosed with COVID-19, was transferred back to their original room without family notification. Resident #14, with moderately impaired cognition and a COVID-19 diagnosis, was moved off the isolation unit without the family being informed. Interviews with facility staff revealed inconsistencies in the notification process. LPN D stated that the nurse transferring the resident to or from the isolation unit was responsible for notifying the doctor and family. LPN A mentioned that they would notify the Director of Nursing, Administrator, Medical Records, the doctor, and the family when a resident was moved to or from the isolation unit. The Administrator expected the family to be notified when a resident was moved. However, the lack of documentation in the progress notes indicated that the families were not informed of the room changes for the three residents.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Care Plans for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents had complete, accurate, and individualized care plans to address their specific needs. This deficiency was identified for three residents out of a sample of 18. The facility's policy requires that care plans be person-centered, comprehensive, and reviewed by an interdisciplinary team. However, the care plans for these residents did not include critical information such as the use of indwelling catheters, bed rails, and mental health evaluations. For Resident #36, the care plan did not include information about the use of an indwelling catheter or bed rails, despite physician orders and evaluations indicating their necessity. Observations confirmed the presence of these devices, yet they were not documented in the care plan. Similarly, Resident #79's care plan lacked documentation regarding the use of bed rails, which were observed in use, and there was no physician order for them. Resident #292's care plan failed to include the resident's PASRR II evaluation and mental health condition, and the resident reported not being invited to care plan meetings. Interviews with facility staff, including the Social Services Director and MDS Coordinator, revealed inconsistencies in the updating of care plans. The staff acknowledged that care plans should be resident-specific and include necessary information such as side rails, catheters, and mental health evaluations. However, the updates were not consistently performed, leading to incomplete care plans that did not reflect the residents' current needs and conditions.
Failure to Provide Adequate ADL Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) for three residents, leading to deficiencies in personal care. One resident, diagnosed with Parkinsonism and diabetes, was observed multiple times in a soiled hospital gown and bed sheets, with red and pink spots from food. Despite the resident's inability to feed themselves due to hand tremors, staff did not assist with meals, leaving the resident hungry and unclean. The resident's call light was out of reach, and they reported yelling for assistance without response. Interviews with staff confirmed the resident required total assistance with meals, yet this was not consistently provided. Another resident, who required supervision and assistance with toileting hygiene, was found soaked in urine during the night shift. The resident's care plan indicated a risk for skin integrity issues, yet staff failed to check on the resident regularly, resulting in a saturated bed pad and wet sheets. The CNAs were unaware of their assignment to the resident, leading to a lack of timely personal care. A third resident, with cognitive impairment and contracted hands, required assistance with eating. Despite a dietician's recommendation for staff to assist the resident during meals, observations showed the resident eating slowly and without help. A CNA removed the resident's meal tray, further hindering their ability to eat. The facility's administrator and DON acknowledged the failures in providing necessary ADL care, including feeding assistance, as required by federal regulations.
Lack of Resident Activities During COVID Outbreak
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide an ongoing activity program based on resident preferences, which led to dissatisfaction among residents. Observations, interviews, and record reviews revealed that the facility did not offer sufficient activities to meet the needs of its residents. The resident council meeting participants reported that activities were insufficient, and several residents expressed concerns about the lack of activities. The facility's activity calendar showed a limited range of activities, and during the survey, no activities were observed taking place. Several residents, including those who were cognitively intact and those with moderate cognitive impairments, reported a lack of activities. Residents were confined to their rooms due to a COVID outbreak, but even before the outbreak, activities were limited. The facility's care plans indicated that residents should receive in-room activities during isolation, but residents reported that these were not provided. Many residents expressed a desire for more engagement, such as puzzles, cards, and one-on-one interactions, which were not offered. Interviews with staff, including CNAs and the Activity Director, confirmed that activities had been suspended for about three weeks due to the COVID outbreak. The Activity Director mentioned that an assistant was supposed to conduct room visits and one-on-one activities, but the assistant was out with COVID. The Administrator and DON acknowledged that activities should have continued even during the outbreak and should have been documented, but this was not done.
Failure to Follow Respiratory Evaluation Orders for COVID-19 Positive Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that physicians' orders for respiratory evaluation and treatments were followed for five residents diagnosed with COVID-19. These residents were identified as having various cognitive impairments and medical conditions, including kidney failure, dementia, heart disease, and depression. Despite being placed under respiratory precautions, the facility did not complete the required respiratory evaluations consistently. For instance, Resident #50 had 15 out of 30 evaluation opportunities missed, while Resident #62 had 21 out of 30 evaluations not completed. The care plans for these residents indicated a focus on preventing complications from COVID-19, with goals to avoid hospitalization and interventions that included ongoing respiratory assessments. However, the facility's records showed significant gaps in completing these assessments. Resident #31, for example, had 19 out of 30 evaluations not completed, and similar deficiencies were noted for Residents #14 and #44, with 19 and 13 missed evaluations, respectively. Interviews with facility staff, including LPNs and the Administrator, revealed that respiratory assessments were expected to be completed every shift and documented accordingly. However, the assessments were not consistently performed, as evidenced by the missed evaluation opportunities. The Administrator acknowledged the expectation for staff to follow physician orders and complete the necessary respiratory assessments, highlighting a failure in adherence to these protocols.
Medication Administration Errors in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5%, resulting in a 12.12% error rate. This was identified through observations, interviews, and record reviews involving four residents. The errors included improper administration of insulin and incorrect dosage of medication. Specifically, insulin pens were not primed before administration for two residents, and a resident received double the prescribed dose of a diuretic medication. Resident #242, diagnosed with endocarditis, experienced an issue with the administration of intravenous fluids. The staff member was unsure if the PICC line was flushed correctly, as there was no clear documentation or communication regarding the procedure. This lack of clarity and adherence to physician orders contributed to the medication error rate. Interviews with staff, including LPNs and the Director of Nursing, revealed inconsistencies in following the facility's medication administration policy. Staff members demonstrated a lack of understanding of the correct procedures for insulin pen priming and medication dosage. The Director of Nursing and the Administrator expressed expectations for staff to adhere to the five rights of medication administration and follow physician orders, which were not consistently met.
Infection Control and PPE Deficiencies in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by staff not wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) during high-contact activities with residents on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). Observations revealed that staff did not wear gowns and failed to change gloves between dirty and clean tasks while providing care to residents with indwelling catheters, feeding tubes, and wounds. This non-compliance was noted in the care of five residents, where staff did not adhere to the facility's policy requiring gown and glove use during high-contact activities such as bathing, transferring, and providing hygiene. Additionally, the facility did not follow its incontinent care policy when providing perineal care to three residents. Staff were observed using improper techniques, such as not changing gloves between dirty and clean tasks and using the same washcloth for different parts of the body. These actions were contrary to the facility's policy, which outlines specific steps for maintaining cleanliness and preventing infection during perineal care. Furthermore, the facility failed to adhere to its Tuberculosis (TB) policy for employees, as six out of ten sampled employees did not have documentation of the required two-step TB skin test. This lack of compliance with TB testing protocols could potentially affect all residents and staff within the facility. Interviews with staff indicated a lack of understanding and adherence to the facility's policies regarding PPE use and TB testing, contributing to the deficiencies observed.
Failure to Complete Discharge Summaries for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a discharge summary, including a recapitulation of the resident's stay and a final summary of the resident's status at the time of discharge, was completed for two residents. Resident #54, who was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including heart failure, kidney failure, diabetes, and high blood pressure, was discharged to a new facility to be closer to family. Despite the completion of an assessment and the resident's compliance with medication and activities of daily living, the medical record lacked a discharge summary. Similarly, Resident #89, who had diagnoses including kidney failure, quadriplegia, muscle weakness, and cognitive communication deficit, was discharged without a completed discharge summary. The resident had initially planned to cancel discharge plans due to insurance noncoverage but eventually proceeded with the discharge. The Social Services Director and nursing staff documented the discharge process, but no discharge summary was retained in the medical record. Interviews with facility staff, including the Clinical Quality Coordinator and Social Services Director, revealed a lack of recollection or documentation of the discharge summaries.
Failure to Follow Wound Treatment Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and care according to professional standards of practice for a resident with an arterial ischemic ulcer on the left heel and ankle. The resident's care plan included specific interventions for wound care, such as assessing the wound and keeping the feet clean and dry. However, observations revealed that the resident's wound dressing was not changed as ordered, resulting in a dirty and loose dressing. The resident reported having to request wound care and noted that the dressing was not changed over the weekend. Interviews with staff indicated that the assigned nurse was responsible for wound care when the wound nurse was unavailable. Despite this, the resident's wound dressing remained unchanged for several days, contrary to the treatment order. The facility's administrator acknowledged the expectation for staff to follow wound treatment orders and adhere to the wound/skin care policy, highlighting a lapse in the facility's adherence to its own protocols.
Inadequate Wound Care Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with wounds received the necessary treatments and services to promote healing. The resident, who was cognitively intact, had multiple diagnoses including heart failure, stroke, calciphylaxis, end-stage renal disease, and a colostomy. The resident had a stage three pressure ulcer and other open lesions. The care plan included specific interventions for wound care, but these were not consistently followed. The resident reported that staff were not changing dressings as ordered, leading to a change in the treatment frequency. The Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed multiple instances where wound care treatments were not documented as completed. For example, there were blank entries for orders to cleanse and dress wounds, indicating missed opportunities for care. Progress notes also showed instances where treatments were not completed due to the resident's leave of absence, unavailability of supplies, or the resident's refusal. Observations confirmed that the resident's dressings were not changed as frequently as required, and there was significant drainage from the wounds. Interviews with staff, including LPNs and the Director of Nursing (DON), highlighted inconsistencies in wound care practices. Staff admitted that blanks on the TAR could mean treatments were not done, and there were expectations to change soiled linens and reposition the resident regularly. The DON acknowledged that the resident's heel wounds were not adequately treated, and the administrator expected wound care to be completed per physician orders. The lack of adherence to the care plan and physician orders contributed to the deficiency in wound care management for the resident.
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 582 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 9 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 Chesterfield
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Friendship Village Chesterfield | 0.5 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Surrey Place St Lukes Hospital Skilled Nursing | 0.7 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Garden View Care Center Of Chesterfield | 1.4 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Delmar Gardens Of Chesterfield | 1.4 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Mason Pointe Care Center | 1.4 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Westchester House, The.
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.