Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around October 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 Careone At Teaneck during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident did not receive enough food and fluids to maintain their health, as observed and documented by surveyors.
A facility did not complete a thorough investigation after a family member reported that a CNA received $100 from a resident via a cash app. The investigation only included a statement from the accused CNA and did not include interviews with the resident or other relevant staff and residents, contrary to facility policy. Both the DON and Social Services Director confirmed the investigation was incomplete.
A resident who required small bites of food was not provided with her selected dinner of grilled steak and was instead served a beef and Asian noodle dish. On another occasion, she ordered strawberry ice cream but received chocolate ice cream, despite her written preference. The Dietary Manager substituted menu items and acknowledged the errors, and the DON confirmed that residents are supposed to have their meal choices accommodated.
A resident with Parkinson's disease who required specialized eating utensils did not receive them during a meal, despite facility policy and documentation indicating their need. Staff confirmed the omission was a mistake, and the DON acknowledged the importance of providing the adaptive utensils for proper self-feeding.
A CNA accepted money from a resident who relied on the CNA for personal care, even though the CNA had completed training on abuse, neglect, and misappropriation, which included instructions not to accept gifts or money from residents. Facility records and staff interviews confirmed that the training addressed these issues.
The facility failed to follow physician orders and document medication administration for multiple residents, including not checking SBP before administering Midodrine HCl, administering medication outside of specified parameters, and failing to document various treatments and medications.
The facility failed to accurately code the MDS for a resident who was transferred to the hospital due to respiratory distress, incorrectly indicating discharge to home or lesser care. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged the error.
The facility failed to accurately document a resident's condition and transfer to the hospital, with missing nursing documentation on several dates. The resident, who had multiple diagnoses and intact cognition, was transferred for chest pain and admitted with atrial fibrillation and pneumonia. Interviews revealed that documentation was expected every shift, but this was not followed.
Failure to Provide Adequate Food and Fluids
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide sufficient food and fluids to maintain a resident's health. This deficiency was identified by surveyors based on observations and records indicating that the nutritional and hydration needs of at least one resident were not adequately met. The report specifically notes the lack of provision of adequate food and fluids necessary for the resident's health maintenance.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Allegation of Misappropriation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation into an allegation of misappropriation involving one resident. According to the facility's policy, all allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation are to be thoroughly investigated, including interviews with the resident involved, their representative, staff members on all shifts who had contact with the resident during the period of the alleged incident, the resident's roommate, and family members. In this case, a family member reported that a certified nurse aide received $100 from the resident via a cash app. The facility's investigation only included a statement from the accused staff member, who admitted to receiving the money as a gift, and did not include statements from the resident or other relevant individuals. Interviews with the Director of Nursing and the Social Services Director confirmed that the investigation was incomplete, as it did not follow the facility's established procedures for interviewing all necessary parties. The lack of a comprehensive investigation into the allegation of misappropriation meant that the facility did not fully document or address the incident as required by its own policy.
Failure to Honor Resident Food Preferences and Choices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's food preferences as documented in her menu selections. The resident, who required small bites of food, ordered a grilled steak for dinner but was instead served a beef and Asian noodle dish. The resident saved the uneaten meal from the previous night and presented her menu selection sheet, which clearly indicated her choice of grilled steak. The Dietary Manager later explained that he substituted the beef lo Mein for the grilled steak, believing it was an appropriate alternative due to the same meat content and the resident's need for small bites. Additionally, the same resident ordered strawberry ice cream for her noon meal but was served chocolate ice cream instead. The resident had handwritten her preference for two strawberry ice creams on her menu, which was verified by the CNA who delivered the meal. The Dietary Manager acknowledged that this may have been a mistake. The facility's policy states that menus are developed to meet resident choices, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that residents are provided with alternate meal options to accommodate their preferences.
Failure to Provide Required Adaptive Eating Utensils
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with Parkinson's disease, who was cognitively intact and required specialized handled utensils for eating, did not receive the necessary built-up eating utensils during a meal. The facility's policy required adaptive devices to be provided for residents who need or request them, and documentation indicated that the resident used specialized utensils. Observation confirmed that the resident did not receive the required utensils with her meal tray, and staff interviews revealed this was due to a mistake, despite the computer system indicating the utensils should have been included. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the importance of providing these utensils to enable the resident to feed herself properly.
CNA Accepted Money from Dependent Resident Despite Training on Misappropriation
Penalty
Summary
A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) accepted money from a resident who was dependent on the CNA for personal needs, despite having completed training on abuse, neglect, and exploitation, which included information on misappropriation and the prohibition of accepting gifts or money from residents. Record review showed that the CNA had documentation of completing required training, and the facility's job description and assessment documents emphasized the importance of staff education on resident rights and abuse prevention. During an interview, the Director of Nursing confirmed that the training covered the relevant topics and that staff were instructed not to accept gifts or money from residents, even if offered as a gift.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders and Document Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain professional standards of nursing practice by not following physician orders for three residents and failing to document the administration of medications and treatments for three residents. For Resident #19, the facility did not ensure that the systolic blood pressure (SBP) was checked before administering Midodrine HCl, as required by the physician's order. The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) admitted that there was no documentation to prove that the SBP was taken at the time of administration. For Resident #72, the facility administered Midodrine HCl even when the resident's SBP was above the specified parameter of 130. Additionally, the facility failed to document several treatments and medications, including skin prep, moisture barrier cream, incentive spirometry therapy, Celebrex, Nuplazid, pain scores, and side effect tracking. These omissions occurred on multiple dates and shifts, indicating a pattern of non-compliance with physician orders and documentation requirements. Resident #196 also experienced similar issues, with the facility failing to document the administration of quetiapine fumarate, disruptive behavior tracking, pain scores, side effect tracking, vital signs, and wound care treatments. For Resident #197, the facility did not follow the physician's order to hold Midodrine HCl when the SBP was above 150 and administered the medication after the specified time. The facility also failed to document vital signs, incentive spirometry, and wound care treatments on multiple occasions. These deficiencies were discussed with the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), and interim DON, but no additional information was provided.
Inaccurate MDS Coding for Discharged Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for one resident. Specifically, Resident #89 was discharged from the facility, and the Discharge Return Anticipated MDS dated 11/21/23 incorrectly indicated that the resident was discharged to home or lesser care. However, a review of the resident's progress notes on the same date revealed that the resident had been transferred to the hospital due to increased respiratory distress and chest congestion. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged the error during an interview on 2/21/24. The facility's policy requires that any person completing any portion of the MDS assessment certifies the accuracy of that portion, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Accurately Document Resident's Condition and Transfer
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow professional standards and practices to accurately document in the medical record the status of a resident's progress or changes in condition. Specifically, the medical record for a resident who was transferred to the hospital was found to have missing nursing documentation on several dates, including the day of the transfer. The resident, who had intact cognition and multiple diagnoses such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes mellitus II, was transferred to the hospital for chest pain and was admitted with atrial fibrillation and pneumonia. However, the timeline of events provided by the facility was not documented in the resident's electronic health record (EHR). Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) revealed that it is the facility's expectation for nursing staff to document every shift in the EHR under progress notes. Despite this expectation, the surveyor found missing documentation for several days. The facility's policies on charting and documentation, as well as acute condition changes, were reviewed and indicated that changes in the resident's condition should be documented. An LPN interviewed confirmed that skilled nursing notes should be documented daily, especially for residents experiencing changes in condition or being transferred out of the facility.
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 1,237 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 14 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 Teaneck
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family Of Caring At Teaneck Llc | 1.1 mi | — | 17 | 0 |
| Complete Care At Inglemoor, Llc | 1.8 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
| Careone At Wellington | 1.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Complete Care At Regent Llc | 2.4 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Complete Care At Prospect Heights Llc | 2.5 mi | — | 21 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Careone At Teaneck.
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.