ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation in Galloway Township, New Jersey, has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not exceptional. It ranks #224 out of 344 facilities in the state, placing it in the bottom half, and #7 out of 10 in Atlantic County, meaning only three local options are better. The facility's trend is stable, with the same number of issues reported in both 2023 and 2025. Staffing is a concern here, rated 2 out of 5 stars, but with a turnover rate of 38%, which is better than the state average. However, the facility has less RN coverage than 84% of New Jersey facilities, which could affect care quality. In recent inspector findings, staff reported being assigned too many residents, causing some residents to miss showers on certain days. There were also significant sanitation issues in the kitchen, where food items were not stored properly, risking contamination. Overall, while the home has some strengths, such as decent turnover rates, it also has notable weaknesses in staffing and sanitation practices that families should consider.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In New Jersey
- #224/344
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 38% turnover. Near New Jersey's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $3,250 in fines. Higher than 92% of New Jersey facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 17 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for New Jersey. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (38%)
10 points below New Jersey average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near New Jersey average (3.3)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near New Jersey avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
May 2025
7 deficiencies
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and review of other pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that appropriate incontinence care was provided to residents...
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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Complaint # NJ183027
Based on interview, record review, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the 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 observation, interview and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to consis...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined the facility failed to accurately document the administration of two controlled medications for 1 sampled...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, review of medical record and other pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to: a.) ensure blood work was obtained in accordance with physician orde...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, review of medical records, and other facility documents, it was determined that the facility fa...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to handle potentially hazardous foods and maintain sanitation in a safe and cons...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
7 deficiencies
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** During an interview with Surveyor #2 on 3/1/2023 at 11:54 AM, UM/LPN #1 when asked when was the last time the 3rd floounit serve...
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
On 2/28/2023 at 12:14 PM, Surveyor #2 observed the 3rd Floor Dining Room. All residents were served lunch meal on trays. Food was not removed and placed directly on the table.
During an interview wit...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review and review of other facility documentation, it was determined the facility failed to provide necessary care of respiratory equipment consistent with prof...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and review of other facility records, it was determined that the facility Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to utilize the Facility Performance...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that visitors and contracted agents who provided serv...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to handl...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** During an interview with Surveyor #3 on 2/28/2023 at 10:03 AM, CNA #5 that stated that she usually has 20 residents on her assig...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Focused Infection Control Survey
Based on observations, interviews, and the review of other pertinent facility documents on 12/13/2022 and 12/14/2022, it was determined that the facility failed to th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • $3,250 in fines. Lower than most New Jersey facilities. Relatively clean record.
- • 38% turnover. Below New Jersey's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within New Jersey, 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 Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation Staffed?
CMS rates ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the New Jersey average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION during 2022 to 2025. These included: 15 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation?
ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION 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 OCEAN HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 186 certified beds and approximately 180 residents (about 97% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in GALLOWAY TOWNSHIP, New Jersey.
How Does Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation Compare to Other New Jersey Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New Jersey, ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.3, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the below-average staffing rating.
Is Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in New Jersey. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation Stick Around?
ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION has a staff turnover rate of 38%, which is about average for New Jersey 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 Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation Ever Fined?
ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION has been fined $3,250 across 1 penalty action. This is below the New Jersey average of $33,111. 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 Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?
ROYAL SUITES HEALTH CARE & REHABILITATION 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.