WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Williamsbridge Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing has a Trust Grade of B, which indicates it is a good choice, solidly positioned above average. It ranks #252 out of 594 facilities in New York, placing it in the top half, and #22 out of 43 in Bronx County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility is improving, as the number of reported issues decreased from 11 in 2023 to just 4 in 2025. While the staffing rating is below average at 2 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 41%, the absence of fines is a positive sign. However, there are concerns regarding RN coverage, as they have less RN presence than 86% of facilities in New York, which may impact care quality. Specific incidents noted during inspections included failures in infection control practices during medication administration, lack of assistance with hand hygiene before meals, and unsanitary conditions in the kitchen and resident bathrooms, indicating areas for improvement. Overall, while there are strengths in their trust grade and fine history, families should be aware of the staffing issues and cleanliness concerns.
- Trust Score
- B
- In New York
- #252/594
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 41% turnover. Near New York's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New York facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 23 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for New York. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (41%)
7 points below New York average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near New York avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Jan 2025
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
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 01/02/2025 to 01/08/2025, the facility di...
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, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 01/02/2025 to 01/08/2025, the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 01/02/2025 to 01/08/2025, t...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 01/02/2025 to 01/08/2025 the facility did not ensure the daily nurse staffing information included...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
11 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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 6/1/23 to 6/21/23, the facility did not e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
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 06/13/23 to 06/21/23, the facility did no...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
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 from 6/13/23 to 6/21/23, the facility d...
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** Based on record reviews and interviews during the Recertification and Abbreviated (#NY00317505) survey, the facility did not ens...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during the recertification and complaint (NY00291600) from 6/13/23...
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 F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and staff interviews conducted during a recertification and complaint (NY00291600) survey, the facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 6/13/23 to 6/21/23, the facility did not ensure a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable envir...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0925
(Tag F0925)
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 06/13/23 through 06/21/23, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey from 6/13/23 to 6/21/23, the facility did not ensure the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable...
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 observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 06/13/2023 to 06/21/2023, the facility did not ensure that a safe food storage was practiced. This...
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
Based on observations, record review, and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 6/13/23 to 6/21/23, the facility did not ensure infection control practices and procedures were ma...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2021
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
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 and Abbreviated survey, the facility did not ensure t...
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, record review and interview during the recertification survey, conducted on 5/28/2021, the facility failed...
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.
- • 41% turnover. Below New York's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within New York, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg Staffed?
CMS rates WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 41%, compared to the New York average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG during 2021 to 2025. These included: 16 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg?
WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG 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 77 certified beds and approximately 74 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in BRONX, New York.
How Does Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg Compare to Other New York Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New York, WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (41%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg?
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 Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG 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 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg Stick Around?
WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG has a staff turnover rate of 41%, which is about average for New York 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 Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg Ever Fined?
WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG 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 Williamsbridge Center For Rehabilitation And Nrsg on Any Federal Watch List?
WILLIAMSBRIDGE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION AND NRSG 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.