EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
ExcelCare at Wilmington LLC has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #23 out of 43 nursing homes in Delaware places this facility in the bottom half, and #12 out of 25 in New Castle County suggests only a few local options are better. While the facility is showing improvement in its issues, with a reduction from 12 in 2023 to 7 in 2024, it still reported a critical incident involving resident-to-resident abuse, highlighting serious safety concerns. Staffing is a relative strength with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 34%, which is better than the state average, while RN coverage is average. However, the facility has incurred fines totaling $38,290, which raises questions about compliance with standards. Specific incidents reveal failures in infection control measures, such as improperly stocked isolation carts and unsafe water temperatures in resident bathrooms, indicating areas needing urgent attention.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Delaware
- #23/43
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 34% turnover. Near Delaware's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $38,290 in fines. Lower than most Delaware facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 51 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Delaware. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 21 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (34%)
14 points below Delaware average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Delaware average (3.3)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
12pts below Delaware avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 21 deficiencies on record
Mar 2024
7 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely report to the state survey agency m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview, document review, and policy review, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, interviews, review of facility provided incident (FRI), and review of facility policy, the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interview, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure four out of four iso...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
12 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0557
(Tag F0557)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that for one (R107) out of six residents reviewed for ADL's, the facility failed to ensure dignity when a soiled blanket was observed on the resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and review of facility documentation, it was determined that for one (R98) out of three Medicare Part A discharges reviewed, the facility failed to provide notice to R98's financial...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview it was determined that for two (100 and 200) out of three units toured, the facility failed t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, record review and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that for one (R7) out of one sampled resident reviewed for grievances, the facility failed to ensure tha...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R47) out of 33 sampled residents, the facility failed to have a MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment that accurately reflected R47's ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that for one (R53) out of 33 sampled residents for care plan investigations, the facility failed to ensure that the required interdisciplinary t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that for one (R88) out of six residents reviewed for ADL (Activities of Daily Living), the facility failed to provide nail care. Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, it was determined that for one (R1) out of two residents sampled for ROM (Range of Motion), the facility failed to ensure that bilateral palm prote...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Dental Services
(Tag F0791)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide routine dental services for two (R47 and R51) out of two sampled residents reviewed for dental...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to adhere to a food preference for one (R53) out of two residents sampled for food investigation. Finding...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain safe water temperatures for the sinks...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop policies and procedures for the monthly MRR (Medication Regimen Reviews) that included time frames for diffe...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2019
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
3. Review of R49's clinical record revealed:
12/10/18 6:30 PM- An interview done as part of a facility investigation stated that R71 hit R49 on the face two times. R49's face was slightly red. R49 sai...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, it was determined that for 11 (R24, R33, R41, R89, R130, R1, R73, R36, R58, R107, R129) ou...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 34% turnover. Below Delaware's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 1 life-threatening violation(s), $38,290 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 21 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $38,290 in fines. Higher than 94% of Delaware facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (28/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Excelcare At Wilmington Llc's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Delaware, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Excelcare At Wilmington Llc Staffed?
CMS rates EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 34%, compared to the Delaware average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Excelcare At Wilmington Llc?
State health inspectors documented 21 deficiencies at EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC during 2019 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 19 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Excelcare At Wilmington Llc?
EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by EXCELCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 150 certified beds and approximately 136 residents (about 91% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in WILMINGTON, Delaware.
How Does Excelcare At Wilmington Llc Compare to Other Delaware Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Delaware, EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.3, staff turnover (34%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Excelcare At Wilmington Llc?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Excelcare At Wilmington Llc Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Delaware. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Excelcare At Wilmington Llc Stick Around?
EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC has a staff turnover rate of 34%, which is about average for Delaware nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Excelcare At Wilmington Llc Ever Fined?
EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC has been fined $38,290 across 1 penalty action. The Delaware average is $33,462. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Excelcare At Wilmington Llc on Any Federal Watch List?
EXCELCARE AT WILMINGTON LLC is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.