SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing Care Center has a Trust Grade of C+, meaning it is slightly above average but still has room for improvement. It ranks #329 out of 594 facilities in New York, placing it in the bottom half, and #29 out of 40 in Kings County, indicating that there are better local options available. The facility's trend is worsening, as the number of identified issues rose from 5 in 2023 to 8 in 2025. While staffing turnover is relatively low at 26%, suggesting a stable workforce, the facility has less RN coverage than 88% of New York facilities, which may pose risks for resident care. Additionally, there have been specific concerns, such as a lack of sufficient nursing staff on weekends that could compromise resident safety, and improper food storage practices, including expired items found in the kitchen. However, it is worth noting that the facility has no fines on record, which is a positive sign, and it achieves excellent scores in quality measures. Overall, families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering this nursing home for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In New York
- #329/594
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 26% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 22 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 20 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for New York. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (26%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (26%)
22 points below New York average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Near New York average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
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
Safe Transfer
(Tag F0626)
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 an abbreviated survey (NY00351563), the facility did not permit a residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2025
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0553
(Tag F0553)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 02/05/2025 to 02/12/2025, the facility did...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review conducted during the Recertification survey from 02/05/2025 through 02/12/2025, the facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 02/05/2025 to 02/12/2025, the...
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 and interview during the Recertification and Complaint Survey (NY00331525) conducted from 02/05/2025 to 0...
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 during the Recertification Survey conducted from 02/05/2025 to 02/12/2025, 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
Based on observation, record review, and interview during the Recertification Survey conducted from 02/05/2025 to 02/12/2025, the facility did not ensure that infection control practices were maintain...
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
Based on record review and interviews during the Recertification Survey conducted from 02/05/2025 to 02/12/2025, the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff were available to provide nursing ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0675
(Tag F0675)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews conducted during a recertification survey from 1/19/23 to 1/26/23, the faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 1/19/23 to 1/26/23, the facility did not ensure medications and biologicals were stored in accordan...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0888
(Tag F0888)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey initiated on 1/19/23 and completed on 1/26/23, the facility did not implement policies and procedures to ...
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 1/19/23 to 1/26/23, the facility did not ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served...
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** 2.) Resident #86 had diagnoses of CA and cerebrovascular accident.
The Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] docum...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2019
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
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, the facility did not ensure that a copy of th...
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 observations, record reviews and staff interview conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensu...
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 observations, record review and staff interviews conducted during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensu...
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.
- • 26% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 22 points below New York's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE CENTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within New York, 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 Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing Staffed?
CMS rates SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 26%, compared to the New York average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing?
State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE CENTER during 2019 to 2025. These included: 16 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing?
SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE 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 BENJAMIN LANDA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 180 certified beds and approximately 181 residents (about 101% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in BROOKLYN, New York.
How Does Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing Compare to Other New York Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New York, SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (26%) 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 Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing?
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 Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE 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 3-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 Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing Stick Around?
Staff at SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE CENTER tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 26%, the facility is 20 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.
Was Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing Ever Fined?
SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE 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 Spring Creek Rehabilitation & Nursing on Any Federal Watch List?
SPRING CREEK REHABILITATION & NURSING CARE 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.