WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER

3155 GRACE AVENUE, BRONX, NY 10469 (718) 379-8100
For profit - Limited Liability company 524 Beds CASSENA CARE Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
85/100
#131 of 594 in NY
Last Inspection: April 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Workmen's Circle Multicare Center in the Bronx has a Trust Grade of B+, indicating it is above average and recommended for families considering care options. It ranks #131 out of 594 facilities in New York, placing it in the top half, and #13 out of 43 in Bronx County, meaning only 12 local facilities are rated higher. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from 4 in 2023 to 2 in 2025. Staffing is average with a rating of 3 out of 5, and a turnover rate of 38%, which is slightly below the New York average of 40%. Notably, the center has no fines on record, demonstrating a good compliance history, and boasts more RN coverage than 95% of state facilities, enhancing patient care. However, there have been some concerning incidents. In one case, a resident fell and sustained a scalp laceration during a transfer due to improper use of a Hoyer lift, indicating a lapse in supervision and procedure. Additionally, there have been issues with the management of controlled substances, where medications were not properly accounted for and stored securely, raising potential safety concerns. Families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering this facility for their loved ones.

Trust Score
B+
85/100
In New York
#131/594
Top 22%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Better
4 → 2 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
38% 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
✓ Good
Each resident gets 66 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of New York nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
○ Average
7 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 4 issues
2025: 2 issues

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 York average of 48%

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 38%

Near New York avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: CASSENA CARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 7 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Apr 2025 2 deficiencies
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, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey conducted from 04/03/2025 to 04/10/2025, the facility did not ensure an account of all controlled drugs was mainta...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interviews during the Recertification Survey conducted from 04/03/2025 to 04/10/2025, the facility did not ensure an account of all controlled drugs was maintained and periodically reconciled. This was evident in 1 (Unit 2 South) of 12 units observed during the Medication Storage Task. Specifically, controlled medications were not periodically reconciled in Unit 2 South. The Individual Controlled Medication Records forms were missing licensed nurses' signatures validating the correct narcotic count. The Findings are: The facility policy titled Controlled Substances-Delivery, Storage, Count, Administration, Wasting and Return with effective date of 01/2023 documented a narcotic count will be conducted at the change of each shift. The total number of cards, and/or controlled drug containers are to be counted with every narcotic count for accuracy and documented on the unit's narcotic supply shift-to-shift accountability record. All off-going nurses will remain on the unit until the count has been completed and reconciled. During an observation on 04/07/2025 at 2:52 PM in Unit 2 South, the Medication Room adjacent to the nurse's station was inspected. The unit 2 South narcotic box was observed with multiple packs of Schedule II - V controlled medications separately bagged along with the Individual Controlled Medication Record forms. The Individual Controlled Medication Records forms did not document shift-to-shift licensed nurses' signatures validating the correct narcotic counts. Registered Nurse #6 was immediately interviewed after the observation on 04/07/2025. They stated the narcotics that are on the shelf are either discontinued or the resident has been discharged . Registered Nurse #6 stated they are not sure when they were placed there, and they did not count them with another nurse at the change of shift this morning. Register Nurse #6 was unable to explain why the narcotics were not kept double locked or counted at the change of shift that morning. Resident #662's Individual Controlled Medication Record for Morphine Sulfate Solution 5 mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/28/2025. Resident #62 was discharged on 03/23/2025. Resident #486's Individual Controlled Medication Record for Oxycodone 5mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/07/2025 and the medication was discontinued on 02/26/2025. Resident #663's Individual Controlled Medication Record for Oxycodone 10 mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/08/2025. Pregabalin 200 mg and Clonazepam 1 mg were last reconciled and signed on 03/10/2025. Resident #663 was discharged 0n 02/27/2025. Resident #664's Individual Controlled Medication Records for Oxycodone 5 mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/07/2025 and the medication was discontinued on 03/04/2025. Oxycodone 5-325 mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/08/2025 and the medication was discontinued on 02/17/2025. Oxycodone-Acetaminophen 7.5mg-325 mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/18/2025. Resident #664 was discharged on 03/14/2025. Resident #665's Individual Controlled Medication Record for Tramadol 50 mg was last reconciled and signed on 03/08/2025. Resident #665 was discharged on 02/05/2025. During an interview on 04/07/2025 at 3:08 PM, Registered Nurse #7 who was also the unit supervisor was interviewed. They stated these medications are discontinued controlled substances which should have been stored in the second double locked cabinet and counted with 2 nurses every shift, until they were returned to the Assistant Director of Nursing's office. Registered Nurse #7 further stated the Assistant Director of Nursing was not working this past weekend, so they were not removed. Also, the controlled medications may have been placed on the shelf since they did not fit in the smaller second locked cabinet. Registered Nurse #7 was unable to explain why the controlled medications were not being counted and signed by the oncoming and off-going nurses every shift to validate the correct narcotic count. During an interview on 04/09/2025 at 10:34 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing stated when a narcotic is discontinued or a resident is discharged the nursing supervisor is supposed to return the controlled medications to the Assistant Director of Nursing's office for disposal. Until then, the controlled medications should have been stored in the double locked narcotic cabinet and counted with 2 nurses every shift. During an interview on 04/09/2025 at 3:54 PM, the Director of Nursing stated all controlled medications should be stored in the double locked narcotic cabinets and counted by 2 nurses at each shift change. 10 NYCRR 415.18(a)
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 04/03/2025 to 04/10/2025, the facility did not ensure that the storage for controlled drugs listed i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 04/03/2025 to 04/10/2025, the facility did not ensure that the storage for controlled drugs listed in Schedule II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1976 were safe and secure. This was evident in 1 (Unit 2 South) of 12 units during the Medication Storage Task. Specifically, numerous controlled medications were secured in a one locked instead of double-locked cabinet per the regulations. The findings are: The facility policy titled Controlled Substances-Delivery, Storage, Count, Administration, Wasting and Return effective date of 01/2023 documented All controlled substances will be stored in a double door, double locked, permanently affixed to the wall, narcotic cabinet in the medication room During an observation on 04/07/2025 at 2:52 PM in Unit 2 South, the Medication Room adjacent to the nurse's station was inspected. The Unit 2 South narcotic box was observed with multiple packs of Schedule II - V controlled medications inside the first locked door of the cabinet on top of a smaller second locked narcotic box. The controlled medications were secured with only one lock. Registered Nurse #6 was immediately interviewed after the observation on 04/07/2025. They stated the narcotics that are on the shelf are either discontinued or the resident has been discharged . Registered Nurse #6 stated they are not sure when they were placed there, and they did not count them with another nurse at the change of shift this morning. Registered Nurse #6 further stated the nursing supervisor usually returns the discharged and discontinued narcotics to the Assistant Director of Nursing's office. Register Nurse #6 was unable to explain why the narcotics were not kept in a double locked cabinet. During an interview on 04/07/2025 at 3:08 PM, Registered Nurse #7, who was also the unit supervisor, was interviewed. They stated these medications are discontinued controlled substances which should have been stored in the second double locked cabinet until they were returned to the Assistant Director of Nursing's office. Registered Nurse #7 further stated the Assistant Director of Nursing was not working this past weekend, so they were not removed. The controlled medications may have been placed on the shelf since they didn't fit in the smaller second locked cabinet. During an interview on 04/09/2025 at 10:34 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing stated when a narcotic is discontinued, or the resident is discharged the nursing supervisor is supposed to return the controlled medications to the Assistant Director of Nursing's office for disposal. Until then, the controlled medications should have been stored in a double locked narcotic cabinet. During an interview on 04/09/2025 at 3:54 PM, the Director of Nursing stated all controlled medications should be stored in double locked narcotic cabinets. The nursing supervisors are supposed to notify the Assistant Director of Nursing when they have controlled medications that are discontinued and need to be returned to the nursing office for proper disposal. 10 NYCRR 415.18(e) (1-4)
Aug 2023 2 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

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, interviews, and record review conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00319096), the facility failed to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00319096), the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegations of abuse were made to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH). Additionally, the facility failed to ensure that an alleged violation of sexual abuse was reported to the local law enforcement. This was evident in 1 of 3 residents sampled for abuse (Resident #1). Specifically, on 06/28/2023, the facility received a report from the hospital Social Worker (SW) stating that Resident #1 alleged that an x-ray technician inappropriately touched their breasts during a chest x-ray procedure. The facility did not report the allegation to the NYSDOH and to local law enforcement. The findings are: The policy titled Reporting and Investigation of Resident Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation/Exploitation and Mistreatment with an effective date of 10/2022 stated that all staff members have an obligation to report any reasonable suspicion of a crime to the police and State Survey Agency. The employee must make the report to the police within 2 hours after they suspect that a crime has occurred if the crime involves serious bodily injury to the individual or within 24 hours if there is no serious bodily injury involved. The facility shall ensure that alleged violations involving mistreatment, neglect, or abuse are reported immediately to the Administrator and when required by law or regulation, the facility shall ensure timely notification to the Department of Health. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) with Heart Failure and Stage 5 CKD, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The Minimum Data Set with assessment reference date of 03/19/2023 documented that Resident #1 had intact cognition. A Grievance / Complaint Form dated 06/28/2023 documented that the Director of Admissions (DOA) received a phone call from the Hospital SW regarding Resident #1's allegation against an x-ray technician. The hospital SW advised the facility that they also notified the NYSDOH. The grievance form documented that no other information was provided by the hospital SW. Chart reviewed and the radiology company was notified of the allegation. An interview was not done with Resident #1 as the Resident was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Unable to obtain date, time, and procedure from the hospital SW. Resident #1 was last seen for arterial doppler on 05/04/2023. Prior to this date there was no concerns expressed by the resident. Unable to reach Resident #1. A copy of investigation was received from the radiology company. The facility concluded that there was no evidence of abuse, neglect, misappropriation, or exploitation. The radiology company's Client Accident / Incident / Grievance Report dated 06/28/2023 documented that the facility contacted the radiology company regarding the allegation made by Resident #1 while at the hospital that they had been a subject to inappropriate conduct by a technologist during a diagnostic test at the facility. The summary of investigation documented that each technologist who performed diagnostic testing on Resident #1 was contacted and each confirmed that they did not have memory of the specific resident and exam. The radiology company's action plan to prevent recurrence documented that the radiology company will perform in-servicing on residents' rights and sexual harassment on a company wide basis and will continue to monitor the technologists. There was no documented evidence that the facility reported the allegation to the NYSDOH and to local law enforcement. During an interview on 08/11/2023 at 11:57 am, Resident #1 stated that they were a resident at the facility and that sometime in May 2023, a technician came to their room to perform a chest x-ray. Resident #1 stated that the technician pulled their gown down to where their breasts were coming out and that the technician kept cupping and bringing their breasts up. Resident #1 stated that they do not know if it was part of the procedure, but that they felt uncomfortable. Resident #1 stated that they reported the alleged incident to the hospital SW. During an interview on 07/31/2023 at 1:25 pm, the DOA stated that they received a call from the Hospital SW on 06/28/2023 at about 9:19 am about an allegation made by Resident #1 against an x-ray technician being inappropriate. The DOA stated that they were not given any details. The DOA said that they reported the allegations to the Director of Social Service (DSS), the Administrator, the Director of Nursing (DON), and the [NAME] President of Admissions. During an interview on 07/31/2023 at 5:15 pm, the DSS stated that they received a grievance on 06/28/2023 about Resident #1 making allegations against a technician. They stated that it is the DON's responsibility to notify the NYSDOH. The DSS stated that they must check to see why the police was not notified. During an interview on 07/31/2023 at 3:26 pm, the DON stated that they found out about the allegation on 07/21/2023 when they received a call from the Attorney General's (AG) office regarding a technician who inappropriately touched Resident #1 during a chest x-ray procedure. The DON said that they did not call the police and did not report the allegation to the NYSDOH because they received the call a month late and that Resident #1 was discharged . The DON stated that the facility policy on sexual abuse states that they must report the allegation to the NYSDOH and immediately call the police. During an interview on 07/31/2023 at 5:48 pm, the Administrator stated that they were made aware of the Resident #1's allegation by the Admissions Department on 06/28/2023. The Administrator stated that for any allegations of abuse, the facility has a 2-hour time frame to report the allegation to the NYSDOH and the police must be called right away. The Administrator stated that the allegation was not reported to the NYSDOH, and the police was not called because Resident #1 was discharged from the facility. 10 NYCRR 415.4(b)
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 observation, interviews and record review conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00319096), the facility failed to e...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews and record review conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00319096), the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were thoroughly investigated. This was evident in 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) sampled for abuse. Specifically, on 06/28/2023, the facility received a report from the hospital social worker (SW) stating that Resident #1 alleged that an x-ray technician inappropriately touched their breasts during a chest x-ray procedure. The facility initiated an investigation but did not thoroughly investigate the allegation. There were no statements from staff members. The findings are: The facility's policy titled Reporting and Investigating of Resident Abuse, Neglect, misappropriation/Exploitation, and Mistreatment with effective date of 10/2022 stated that the facility shall conduct a thorough investigation of all alleged violations involving abuse. The policy also states that staff involved, and other witnesses will be identified and interviewed regarding any knowledge of the allegation. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) with Heart Failure and Stage 5 CKD, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The Minimum Data Set with assessment reference date of 03/19/2023 documented that Resident #1 had intact cognition. A Grievance / Complaint Form dated 06/28/2023 documented that the Director of Admissions (DOA) received a phone call from the Hospital SW regarding Resident #1's allegation against an x-ray technician. The hospital SW advised the facility that they also notified the NYSDOH. The grievance form documented that no other information was provided by the hospital SW. Chart reviewed and the radiology company was notified of the allegation. An interview was not done with Resident #1 as the Resident was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Unable to obtain date, time, and procedure from the hospital SW. Resident #1 was last seen for arterial doppler on 05/04/2023. Prior to this date there was no concerns expressed by the resident. Unable to reach Resident #1. A copy of investigation was received from the radiology company. The facility concluded that there was no evidence of abuse, neglect, misappropriation, or exploitation. There was no documented evidence that frontline unit staff members were interviewed or provided statements regarding the alleged abuse allegation. During an interview on 08/11/2023 at 11:57 am, Resident #1 stated that they were a resident at the facility and that sometime in May 2023, a technician came to their room to perform a chest x-ray. Resident #1 stated that the technician pulled their gown down to where their breasts were coming out and that the technician kept cupping and bringing their breasts up. Resident #1 stated that they do not know if it was part of the procedure, but that they felt uncomfortable. Resident #1 stated that they reported the alleged incident to the hospital SW. During an interview with the hospital SW on 08/11/2023 at 3:15 pm, the hospital SW stated that they called the facility on 06/28/2023 and notified the DOA that Resident #1 reported that a staff, who performed a chest x-ray, touched Resident #1's breasts inappropriately. During an interview on 07/31/2023 at 3:26 am, the DON said that they initiated the investigation by reaching out to the radiology company. The DON said that they did not gather statements from the staff because they did not receive the report from the staff. The DON stated that the facility policy on sexual abuse states that they must start an investigation by gathering statements from staff, perform a full body assessment on the resident, report the allegation to the NYSDOH and call the police. During an interview on 07/31/2023 at 5:48 pm, the Administrator stated that they were made aware by the Admissions Department, on 06/28/2023, that a technician was inappropriate towards Resident #1. The Administrator said that they did not gather statements from the facility staff because the allegation is not against the facility staff member. During a follow up interview on 08/21/2023 at 4:16 pm, the Administrator stated that they were not able to reach Resident #1 and that they reviewed the Grievance Report and based on their investigation there was no evidence of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. 10 NYCRR 415.4(b)(3)
Aug 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

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 8/1/2023 through 8/9/2023, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 8/1/2023 through 8/9/2023, the facility did not ensure a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice. This was evident in 1 (Resident #336) of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, Resident # 336 was observed using oxygen (O2) via Nasal Cannula (NC) with no Medical Doctor's Order (MDO). The findings are: The facility policy titled Care of Oxygen Equipment dated November 2017 documented the facility will provide O2 therapy in accordance with the MDO. Resident #336 had diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Renal Insufficiency. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #336's was cognitively intact and did not receive O2 therapy. During an interview on 8/8/2023 at 11:48 AM, Resident #336 stated they have been receiving O2 therapy via NC since their admission to the facility. On 8/2/2023 at 9:27 AM, 8/4/2023 at 12:12 PM, 8/7/2023 at 8:45 AM, and 08/8/2023 at 11:07 AM, Resident # 336 was observed receiving O2 therapy via NC. The MDO from 7/14/2023 to 8/7/2023 did not document O2 therapy for Resident #336. Medical Doctor Notes dated 7/15/2023, 8/5/2023, and 8/7/2023 do not document Resident #336 receiving O2 therapy. Nursing Notes from 7/16/2023 to 8/6/2023 documented Resident #336 was provided with O2 therapy daily via NC. During an interview on 8/8/2023 at 11:34 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #1 stated Resident #336 received O2 via NC at 2 liters per minute (LPM) for COPD and has been receiving O2 therapy since their admission to the facility on 7/14/2023. RN #1 reviewed Resident #336's medical record and stated there is no MDO for O2 therapy and there should be an MDO to administer O2 to Resident #336. The nurses are supposed to ensure an MDO is in place. During an interview on 8/8/2023 at 12:18 PM, RN Supervisor (RNS) #1 stated there is no MDO for Resident #336 to receive O2 therapy and there should be. The nurses are responsible for obtaining an MDO for O2 therapy. During an interview on 8/8/2023 at 3:06 PM, the Attending Physician (AP) stated they never saw Resident #336 being administered O2 therapy via NC. No one brought it to the AP';s attention. Nursing staff are responsible for ensuring the MDO for O2 therapy was in place. During an interview on 8/9/2023 at 9:18 AM, the Director of Nursing (DNS) stated nurses can administer O2 based on their discretion after an assessment if a resident has shortness of breath. The nurse must obtain an MDO. The DNS stated the nurses should have contacted the AP for a MDO for Resident #336 to receive O2 therapy. 10 NYCRR 415.12(k)(6)
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 observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a recertification survey from 8/1/2023 to 8/9/2023, the fa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a recertification survey from 8/1/2023 to 8/9/2023, the facility did not ensure infection control practices were maintained. This was evident for 1 (Resident #52) of 38 total sampled residents. Specifically, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 did not change gloves after touching Resident #52's soiled dressing during wound care. The findings are: The facility's policy and procedure entitled Clean Dressing Changes, last reviewed 03/2016, states that the treatment nurse washes their hands prior to placing supplies on the overbed table, then dons clean gloves before removing the old dressing. After depositing the used dressing into a disposable trash bag, the gloves are removed, hand hygiene is performed and new gloves are donned. The wound is cleansed and patted dry, then gloves are removed again, hand hygiene is performed and new gloves are donned. The clean dressing is applied, after which hand hygiene is again performed. Resident #52 had diagnoses of right ankle vascular wound. The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #52 was cognitively intact, was at risk for pressure ulcers, and received applications of dressings to the feet. On 08/04/2023 at 09:20 AM, LPN #1 was observed providing Resident #52 with wound care to their right ankle. LPN #1 washed their hands, donned gloves, and removed Resident #52's soiled dressing from their right ankle. LPN #1 did not change gloves or sanitize hands after disposing of the soiled dressing in the trash. An unopened border foam packet fell on the floor and LPN #1 picked up the border foam packet with gloved hands. LPN #1 did not change gloves or sanitize hands after picking up the border foam from the floor and proceeded to dress Resident #52's right ankle wound. The Medical Doctor Order (MDO dated 6/28/2023 documented Resident #52 have right ankle cleansed with normal saline, patted dry, apply skin gentian violet and cover with Kerlix and tape. MDO dated 07/25/2023 documented cleanse Resident #52's right heel with normal saline, apply skin prep to the periwound, apply calcium alginate to the wound bed, and cover with border foam. On 08/04/2023 at 10:53 AM. LPN #1 was interviewed and stated they forgot to change their gloves after thy took off Resident #52's soiled dressing. LPN #1 stated they thought it was appropriate to pick up the border foam from the floor and use it because the package was unopened. LPN #1 stated they should have gotten a new border foam and should have changed their gloves. LPN #1 stated the wound care team was supposed to change Resident #52's wound LPN #1 was not supposed to perform the resident's wound care. On 08/04/2023 at 12:30 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed, and stated nurses were educated to open the dressings using a sterile technique and to follow the MDO. When gloves become soiled, they are supposed to be changed. Wound dressing should be continued after changing gloves or using hand sanitizer. Hand hygiene must be repeated following removal of the soiled wound care dressing. Nurses perform wound care competencies upon orientation and quarterly. The facility nurse educator is on medical leave. LPN #1 had their last wound care competency in 9/2022. 10 NYCRR 415.19(b)(4)
May 2021 1 deficiency 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 05/05/2021 to 05/11/2021, the facil...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interviews conducted during the recertification survey from 05/05/2021 to 05/11/2021, the facility did not ensure a resident received adequate supervision and assistance to prevent accidents. Specifically, the staff did not properly position the Hoyer Lift (mechanical lift) canvas (pad) underneath a resident in preparation for a Hoyer lift transfer. The staff attempted to transfer the resident from the Geri chair (medical recliner) to the bed using the Hoyer lift, and the resident slid off the canvas and fell to the floor. The resident sustained a scalp laceration requiring a staple to the head. This was evident in 1 of 7 residents reviewed for Accidents (Resident #356). This resulted in actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy. The finding is: The facility policy and procedure titled, Lifting and Transferring of Residents (Dated 06/2013) documented the following: All nursing staff (nurses and nursing assistants) are responsible for knowing the proper procedures when operating assistive devices. The Mechanical Lift Skill Competency attached documented that positioning the canvas seat (pad) under the resident, so that the lower edge of the seat is slightly below the knees and the upper edge behind the shoulders is checked during the competency. Resident #356 was readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which include Non-Alzheimer's dementia, muscle weakness, and hypertension. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment, dated 01/12/2021, documented the resident had severely impaired cognition, and the resident required the total assist of two persons for transfer. The resident had bilateral upper and lower extremity range of motion (ROM) impairment, and the resident did not have any falls during the review period. The Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) titled, The resident has Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Self-Care Performance Deficit related to Activity Intolerance, Cognitive Impairment, Dementia and present medical condition, effective 03/25/2020, documented the resident was totally dependent on staff and required a Hoyer/ Mechanical lift with the assist of two persons for transfers. The CCP titled, Resident is at risk for falls/injury related to Activity level limitation, Cognitive Impairment, effective 03/25/2020, included interventions to follow the facility fall protocol and monitor/anticipate/intervene for factors causing potential/prior falls. The Physician's orders, effective date 03/25/2020, documented orders for the resident to be transferred out of bed to the Geri chair via mechanical Hoyer lift with assist of two persons. The Physician's orders, effective date 03/26/2020, documented the resident was on fall precautions. The monthly maintenance log dated 12/10/2020 documented that the Hoyer lift was inspected and was found to be in good condition and function. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) [NAME] and resident care instructions, dated 01/01/2021, documented the Resident #356 was on fall safety precautions and required the total assist of two persons using a Hoyer lift during transfers. The Accident and Incident (A/I) report dated 01/20/2021 documented the following: The resident fell to the floor when being transferred from the Geri chair to bed and sustained bleeding with back of head swelling. The physician was informed of the accident, and the resident was transferred to the hospital. The preliminary finding of the facility investigation documented during the transfer, the strap from the pad slipped out of place resulting in the fall. Staff was provided with education, in-service and completed return demonstration. An addendum was made after an inspection of the Hoyer lift was completed on 01/22/2021. The Hoyer lift was found to be functioning well. The investigation finding written by the Director of Nursing (DON) documented it was possible that the resident was not positioned exactly at the center of the pad, and the unevenness may have caused the resident to slide off the Hoyer pad and fall to the floor. Nursing Note (NN) completed by a Registered Nurse (RN #1) dated 01/20/2021 documented the following. The Resident #356 fell on the floor and resulted in some bleeding and swelling on the back of the head. The physician and family member were notified of incident and resident was transferred to the hospital. NN completed by the RN Supervisor (RN #2) dated 01/20/2021 documented the following. The Resident #356 had a fall from the Hoyer lift during a transfer from the Geri chair to the bed. When the RN and CNA were moving the resident from the Hoyer lift in mid-air, Resident #356 accidently fell hitting their head on the metal base of the lift. Resident #356 was found with bleeding and swelling on the back of the head. Ice was applied on the back of their head. The physician was notified and ordered Resident #356 to be transferred to the hospital. The Physician's Order dated 1/20/2021 documented instructions to transfer the resident to the hospital for evaluation. The CCP titled, The resident has had an actual fall related to Activity level limitation, Cognitive Impairment, Osteoporosis, Effective 03/25/2020 and revised 01/20/2021, documented the resident had a fall and sustained bleeding and swelling on the back of the head. On 1/20/21, the intervention to anticipate and meet the resident's needs was added. The hospital summary of medical treatment dated 01/21/2021 documented the resident received an x-ray of the chest and pelvis and a Computed Tomography (CT) of the head and spine which all showed no fracture or other traumatic injury. The resident was treated for a small posterior scalp laceration that was repaired with one staple. A NN completed by a RN dated 01/21/2021 documented the following. The resident returned from the hospital with a small posterior scalp laceration repaired with one staple. Treatment with Bacitracin was recommended. Physician orders dated 01/21/2021 documented resident was prescribed with the following treatment. Clean wound with DermaKlenz, apply Bacitracin, cover with dry protective dressing (DPD) to back of head laceration as needed and every night for wound care for 14 days. Order was discontinued on 02/22/2021. The Director of Maintenance statement dated 01/22/2021 documented the following. The Hoyer lift was inspected by both the maintenance department and Scale USA (lift company). The machine was found to be in good working order. The monthly maintenance log dated 01/22/2021 documented the Hoyer lift was inspected and was found to be in good condition and function. Physician orders dated 01/28/2021 documented orders for the staple to be removed from the back of the resident's head. The Medication and Treatment Administration Records dated January 2021 and February 2021 documented the resident received treatment to the head laceration as ordered. On 05/06/2021 at 10:42 AM, the resident's designated representative was interviewed. The family member stated that the resident had a fall maybe about a month ago in their room. During a transfer from the bed to the wheelchair, the resident slipped out of the lift and fell on the floor hitting their head on a table. The resident was sent to the hospital for observation, and they were okay. The family member stated the facility had provided notification and updates right after the incident occurred and notification on resident's return from the hospital. The family member believed that the resident slipped and fell due to the way the staff lifted the resident, but they were not sure. The Registered Nurse (RN #1) was interviewed on 05/10/2021 at 04:23 PM and 05/11/2021 at 02:30 PM. RN #1 stated CNA #1 asked for assistance with transferring the resident from the Geri chair to bed using the Hoyer lift. The proper way to transfer a resident is to make sure the pad is positioned correctly underneath the resident, by the neck and legs. The straps are hooked to the machine. The RN stated the resident was on the Geri chair at first, and the Hoyer lift pad was already under the resident. RN #1 stated that the pad was under the resident's shoulder area instead of the neck area. Then both RN #1 and CNA #1 hooked the straps onto the machine. As the resident was being lifted, the resident slipped backwards, hitting their head at the edge of the machine. The RN supervisor was contacted right away. RN #1 stated that the padding was not positioned correctly on the resident prior to transfer. RN #1 received an in-service afterwards on how to properly use the Hoyer lift which includes padding placement, checking the straps, and leg positioning. During a follow up interview, the next day, RN #1 stated the padding was not fully underneath the resident during the transfer which resulted in the resident falling. On 05/10/2021 at 04:35 PM, RN #2 was interviewed. Upon notification of the incident, Resident #356 was assessed and found to have bleeding and swelling in the back of the head. The resident was sent to the hospital and had a CT scan which revealed no fractures. The RN #2 further stated that the Hoyer lift padding was not positioned correctly under the resident resulting in the resident falling out. On 05/11/2021 at 11:07 AM, CNA #1 who was involved in the incident was attempted to be interviewed. As per administrative staff, CNA #1 resigned, and the contact number provided was no longer active. On 05/11/2021 at 11:35 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was interviewed. Resident #356 fell from the Hoyer lift during a transfer from the chair to the bed. RN #1 assisted CNA #1 with transferring Resident #356. The ADON and RN Supervisor assessed the resident, provided first aid, and the resident was transferred to the hospital. They asked the involved staff to do a return demonstration following the incident, and the staff did it correctly by showing how the resident was transferred. At that moment, they concluded that maybe it was a strap malfunction. However, upon completion of investigation, the DON further concluded that equipment malfunction was ruled out and an addendum to the investigation was made that the incident occurred was not due to the pad or machine. It was proposed that the cause of fall was improper positioning of the Resident on the canvas. Resident #356 was not positioned in the center of the pad. On 05/11/2021 at 12:20 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed. The DON was unfamiliar with incident since it occurred before employment at the facility. On 05/11/2021 at 12:42 PM, the Administrator was interviewed. The Administrator was not present during the time of incident since it occurred before employment at facility. 415.12(h)(1)
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

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

Strengths
  • • Grade B+ (85/100). Above average facility, better than most options in New York.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New York facilities.
  • • 38% turnover. Below New York's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • 7 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Workmens Circle Multicare Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Workmens Circle Multicare Center Staffed?

CMS rates WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the New York average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Workmens Circle Multicare Center?

State health inspectors documented 7 deficiencies at WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER during 2021 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 6 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Workmens Circle Multicare Center?

WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER 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 CASSENA CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 524 certified beds and approximately 518 residents (about 99% occupancy), it is a large facility located in BRONX, New York.

How Does Workmens Circle Multicare Center Compare to Other New York Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New York, WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Workmens Circle Multicare Center?

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 Workmens Circle Multicare Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER 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 5-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 Workmens Circle Multicare Center Stick Around?

WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 38%, 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 Workmens Circle Multicare Center Ever Fined?

WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER 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 Workmens Circle Multicare Center on Any Federal Watch List?

WORKMENS CIRCLE MULTICARE CENTER 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.