Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around November 2026
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 Sutton Community Home, Inc. during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to properly store and label food items and did not adhere to hand hygiene protocols during meal service. Observations revealed unlabeled and improperly stored food in the kitchen and outdoor refrigerator. Additionally, staff did not wash hands between glove changes and after handling non-food items, increasing the risk of foodborne illness for all residents.
The facility failed to review pre-employment health history screenings for four staff members, including dietary aides and nurse aides, which is essential for preventing the transmission of contagious diseases. The Infection Control Coordinator did not review the completed Medical History and Screening Forms, as confirmed in interviews, indicating a lapse in the infection prevention and control program.
A facility failed to conduct timely AIMS assessments for a resident receiving Olanzapine, an antipsychotic medication. The resident, with severe cognitive impairment, was not assessed as per the facility's policy, which required AIMS assessments upon medication changes. The oversight was confirmed by the DON, highlighting a deficiency in monitoring the resident's well-being.
The facility failed to implement and monitor interventions for two residents at risk of elopement, particularly one resident with severe cognitive impairment who eloped after exhibiting exit-seeking behavior. Despite having a care plan and a wander guard, no new interventions were added following the elopement incident, as confirmed by the DON and documented in the resident's progress notes.
Food Storage and Hand Hygiene Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper storage and labeling of food items in accordance with the Food Code, as well as failed to perform necessary hand hygiene during meal service. Observations in the kitchen food storage areas revealed several issues: containers of food items in the main kitchen refrigerator were not labeled or dated, including grapefruit sections and a container of light pink food items. In the freezer, a food item labeled 'Turkey Noodle' and egg patties were not properly dated or sealed. Additionally, in the outdoor walk-in refrigerator, limp celery and raw sliced ham were improperly stored, with the ham placed above other food items, which is against food safety protocols. The Dietary Manager confirmed these storage and labeling deficiencies. During meal service, the Dietary Manager and Dietary Cook-H were observed not following proper hand hygiene protocols. The Dietary Manager did not wash hands between glove changes after handling paperwork and before assisting with meal service. Similarly, Dietary Cook-H did not perform hand hygiene after handling bread and cupboard doors before returning to serve meals. Both staff members acknowledged their failure to adhere to hand hygiene requirements, which is a critical step in preventing foodborne illness. These deficiencies had the potential to affect all residents who consumed food prepared in the facility's kitchen.
Failure to Review Pre-Employment Health Screenings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that pre-employment health history screenings were reviewed to prevent the potential transmission of contagious diseases among staff. This deficiency was identified through record reviews, interviews, and observations. Specifically, four staff members, including two dietary aides and two nurse aides, were hired without their Medical History and Screening Forms being reviewed by the Infection Control Coordinator (ICC). These forms, although completed and signed by the staff members, were undated and not reviewed, which is a critical step in preventing the spread of contagious diseases within the facility. During interviews, both the ICC and the Facility Administrator confirmed that the ICC was responsible for reviewing these forms to prevent potential disease transmission. However, the ICC admitted to not having reviewed the Medical History and Screening Forms or the Medical History Questionnaires submitted by the employees. This oversight in the infection prevention and control program highlights a significant lapse in the facility's procedures for safeguarding against the transmission of contagious diseases by staff.
Failure to Conduct Timely AIMS Assessment for Resident on Antipsychotic Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper monitoring of a resident who was receiving antipsychotic medication, specifically Olanzapine. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including mild cognitive impairment, anxiety disorder, and dementia, was severely cognitively impaired as indicated by a BIMS score of 4/15. Despite the facility's policy requiring an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessment to be conducted upon admission, quarterly, with significant changes in condition, or changes in antipsychotic medication, the resident did not receive an AIMS assessment until several months after starting the medication. The resident's care plan included interventions such as administering psychotropic medications as ordered, monitoring for side effects, consulting with the pharmacy and provider for dosage reduction, and educating the resident and family about the medication's risks and benefits. However, the facility did not adhere to its policy of conducting an AIMS assessment when the resident's antipsychotic medication was changed. This oversight was confirmed by the Director of Nursing, who acknowledged that the required AIMS assessment was not completed in a timely manner, leading to a deficiency in monitoring the resident's well-being while on antipsychotic medication.
Failure to Implement Interventions for Elopement Risk
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop, evaluate, and monitor interventions to prevent further elopement for two residents, specifically Resident 12, who was identified as being at risk for elopement due to severe cognitive impairment and a history of wandering. Despite having a wander guard device and a care plan that included interventions such as ensuring adequate lighting and proper fitting clothing, no new interventions were implemented after Resident 12's actual elopement incident on December 10, 2023. The care plan was not updated to address the resident's exit-seeking behavior, which was documented multiple times on the same day as the elopement. The facility's records and interviews with the Director of Nursing confirmed that Resident 12 was actively exit-seeking and had eloped from the facility without any new interventions being put in place to prevent further incidents. The resident's progress notes indicated multiple instances of exit-seeking behavior on December 10, 2023, yet there was no evidence of any changes to the current interventions or the implementation of new strategies to mitigate the risk of elopement. This lack of action and failure to update the care plan contributed to the deficiency identified by the surveyors.
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 25 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 Sutton
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legacy Square | 11.8 mi | — | 10 | 1 |
| Harvard Rest Haven | 12.2 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Fairview Manor | 14.2 mi | — | 5 | 0 |
| Heritage Crossings | 15 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Westfield Quality Care Of Aurora | 19.3 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Sutton Community Home, Inc..
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.