BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Beth Abraham Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing has a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average and falls in the middle of the pack compared to other facilities. It ranks #378 out of 594 in New York, placing it in the bottom half of state facilities, and #33 out of 43 in Bronx County, indicating limited local options. The facility is currently worsening, with the number of issues identified increasing from 1 in 2023 to 10 in 2024. Staffing is a relative strength, earning a 3 out of 5 stars with a turnover rate of 29%, which is below the state average. However, there is concerning RN coverage, with less RN support than 87% of New York facilities, which could impact the quality of care. Specific incidents include the facility failing to secure adequate surety bonds for resident personal funds, leaving over $1.3 million of resident funds under-protected. Additionally, residents were denied the right to send and receive mail on Saturdays, which could affect their communication with loved ones. There were also observations of a resident with severe cognitive impairment not receiving appropriate activities or one-on-one interaction, raising concerns about engagement and care. While there are certainly strengths in staffing, these weaknesses highlight areas that need significant improvement.
- Trust Score
- C
- In New York
- #378/594
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 29% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 19 points below New York's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New York facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 27 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for New York. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 20 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (29%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (29%)
19 points below New York average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below New York average (3.1)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 20 deficiencies on record
Feb 2024
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0568
(Tag F0568)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0569
(Tag F0569)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from [DATE] to [DATE], the facility did not en...
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 observation, interview, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, facil...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2) Resident #84 had diagnoses of dementia and cerebral vascular accident.
The Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] docu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, the ...
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, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, the facility did not ensure infection control practices and procedures were ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0570
(Tag F0570)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, the facility did not ensure a surety bond was purchased to secure all resident personal fu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0576
(Tag F0576)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, the facility did not ensure that residents had the right to send and receive ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3) Resident #124 had diagnoses of Cerebral palsy and anxiety disorder.
The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 1/29/2024 to 2/5/2024, the facility did not ensure garbage and refuse were disposed of properly. Th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
1 deficiency
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
Based on observation, interviews and record review conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00313942), the facility failed to report an alleged violation of abuse to the State Survey Agency. Specific...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2021
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility did not ensure that it electronically transmitted encoded, accurate and complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) data to the Center for Medicaid/Medica...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews and record review conducted during a Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that a portio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that a resident r...
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 observations and interviews conducted during a Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that it established and maintained an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to p...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2019
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0685
(Tag F0685)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure resi...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure a resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interviews, during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that nu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that garbage was properly disposed. Specifically, two garbage receptacles inside th...
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 observation and interview conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that staff maintaine...
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.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New York facilities.
- • 29% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 19 points below New York's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 20 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (58/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within New York, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing Staffed?
CMS rates BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 29%, compared to the New York average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing?
State health inspectors documented 20 deficiencies at BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING during 2019 to 2024. These included: 20 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing?
BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING 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 CENTERS HEALTH CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 448 certified beds and approximately 432 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a large facility located in BRONX, New York.
How Does Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing Compare to Other New York Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New York, BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (29%) 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 Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING 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 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in New York. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing Stick Around?
Staff at BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 29%, the facility is 17 percentage points below the New York average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 16%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing Ever Fined?
BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Beth Abraham Center For Rehabilitation And Nursing on Any Federal Watch List?
BETH ABRAHAM CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING 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.