FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Fieldston Lodge Care Center in Riverdale, New York, has received a Trust Grade of D, indicating below-average performance with some concerns. Ranking #402 out of 594 facilities in New York places it in the bottom half, specifically #35 out of 43 in Bronx County, meaning there are only a few local options that perform better. The facility is showing improvement, with issues decreasing from 9 in 2024 to 2 in 2025, but it still has significant concerns, including $66,859 in fines, which is higher than 88% of similar facilities in the state. Staffing is a strength, rated 4 out of 5 stars, with a turnover of only 31%, which is better than the New York average, and the facility has more RN coverage than 95% of state facilities, ensuring more thorough care. However, there have been serious concerns noted, such as failures to properly manage resident funds and inadequate staffing to meet the needs of residents, alongside issues with food safety that could lead to health risks.
- Trust Score
- D
- In New York
- #402/594
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 31% turnover. Near New York's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $66,859 in fines. Lower than most New York facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 80 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 ⚠ Watch
- 30 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (31%)
17 points below New York average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below New York average (3.1)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
15pts below New York avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Well above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 30 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
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
Based on record review and interviews conducted during an Abbreviated Survey (NY00362877), the facility did not ensure that the alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment,...
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, record review, and interviews conducted during an abbreviated survey (NY00359953), the facility did not en...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
9 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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
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 (Complaint #NY00331841) from 0...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
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 Survey from 03/26/2024 through 04/02/20...
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 interviews conducted during the Recertification and Abbreviated Survey (NY00331841) from 03/26/2024 t...
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** 3.
Resident #82 was admitted with diagnoses of Diabetes Mellitus and Hypothyroidism.
The Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated...
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 F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification and Complaint Survey (NY00327454) from 03/26/2024 through 04/02/2024, the facility did not ensure that each resident's compre...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
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 03/26/2024 through 04/02/20...
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
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 and Complaint Survey (NY00318593) from 0...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview conducted during the Recertification Survey from 03/26/2024 to 04/02/2024, the facility fai...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 03/26/2024 through 04/02/2024, the facili...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2022
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** F578
Fieldston Lodge Care Center
[NAME], LMSW
Based on interviews, observations and record review completed during a recertifica...
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 record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey from 2/23/2022 to 3/2/2022, the facility did n...
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** F656
Fieldston Lodge Care Center
[NAME], LMSW
Based on interviews, observations and record reviews completed during a recertific...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 2/23/2022 to 3/2/2022, the facility did not en...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 interview and record review conducted during a Recertification survey from 2/23/2022 to 3/2/2022, the facility did not ...
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 staff interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification survey conducted from 2/23/22 to 3/2/22, the fa...
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 interviews, observations and record reviews conducted during a Recertification survey from 2/23/22 to 3/2/22, the facility did not ensure timely identification and removal of expired medicati...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during the Recertification survey from 2/23/2022 to 3/2/2022, the facility did not ensure that medication error rates were not 5 percent ...
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 observations and staff interviews conducted during a Recertification survey from 2/23/2022 to 3/2/2022, the facility did not ensure controlled drugs were stored appropriately in locked compar...
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 from 2/23/2022 to 3/2/2022, the facility did not ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2019
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
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 conducted during recertification survey, the facility did not ensure th...
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 record review and interviews conducted during recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the assessment a...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review and interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that drugs an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and Interviews the facility did not ensure that residents, or their representatives were invited to Care...
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** On 07/11/19 at 09:56 AM and 07/15/19 at 10:47 AM, oxygen tubing that connected from the oxygen concentrator to the Viasys air pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0570
(Tag F0570)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and interviews the facility did not ensure a surety bond was purchased to assure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
The findings are:
...
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 observations, interview, and record reviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services as determined by re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility did not ensure that cold foods were stored at a temperature of 41 degrees F and below. Specifically, the facility did not ensure...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews during the recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that the residents received care in a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike en...
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
- • 31% turnover. Below New York's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 30 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • $66,859 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in New York. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade D (40/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Fieldston Lodge's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER 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 Fieldston Lodge Staffed?
CMS rates FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 31%, compared to the New York average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Fieldston Lodge?
State health inspectors documented 30 deficiencies at FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER during 2019 to 2025. These included: 30 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Fieldston Lodge?
FIELDSTON LODGE 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 THE MAYER FAMILY, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 190 certified beds and approximately 168 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in RIVERDALE, New York.
How Does Fieldston Lodge Compare to Other New York Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New York, FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (31%) 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 Fieldston Lodge?
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 Fieldston Lodge Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, FIELDSTON LODGE 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 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 Fieldston Lodge Stick Around?
FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 31%, 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 Fieldston Lodge Ever Fined?
FIELDSTON LODGE CARE CENTER has been fined $66,859 across 1 penalty action. This is above the New York average of $33,747. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Fieldston Lodge on Any Federal Watch List?
FIELDSTON LODGE 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.