Deficiency Index

Careone at Valley

Westwood, New Jersey · CCN 315369

16 surveys since 2011, and no finding has been recorded at harm level.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
40
Surveys
16
Harm or worse
0
Immediate jeopardy
0
The record, 2011–2026
’11’15’20’25’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Harm or worseNone

No finding on record has been cited at harm level or above.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file12/16

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
98
Ownership
For profit - Corporation
Chain
CAREONE
County
Bergen
Medicare-certified since
1997

CMS ratings

Overall
5
Health inspection
5
Staffing
2
Quality measures
5

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=10, floor 20).

Last survey on record

Apr 24, 2026

199 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day3.884.13
Registered-nurse hours per resident day0.61—
Annual nurse turnover23.6%35.4%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD787.5%E112.5%F—
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 8 of the 40 citations on record.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Careone at Valley, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Sep 25, 2025

    Based on observations, document review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that temperatures were obtained for all altered food prior to serving. This had the potential to negatively impact seven residents (Residents (R)16, R22, R8, R48, R52, R102, R86) who received Pureed food, seven residents (R18, R28, R46, R58, R104, R74, R90) who received Soft & Bite sized prepared foods, and two residents (R31, R1) who received Minced & Moist prepared food out of 85 residents reviewed for diet texture. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF689Apr 24, 2026

    Based on observations, interviews, medical record review, and review of other pertinent facility documentation on 4/23/26 and 4/24/26, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe environment for its residents. The facility failed to ensure that a resident (Resident #2) who was an elopement risk upon admission, remained in the facility. The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent residents from eloping from the facility. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for elopement (Resident #2).A review of the Facility Reportable Event (FRE) submitted to the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) was dated 4/17/26 and contained information regarding Resident #2's elopement. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF657Sep 25, 2025

    Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 66) of 24 residents reviewed was invited to their scheduled care plan conference. Specifically, the facility failed to invite R66 to her care conference to discuss discharge plans. This had to potential to cause R66 uncertainty about her plan of care. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care Planning - Interdisciplinary Team dated 03/2022 revealed, Care plan meetings are scheduled at the best time of the day for the resident and family when possible.If it is determined that participation of the resident or representative is not practicable for development of the care plan, an explanation is documented in the medical record. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF881Sep 25, 2025

    Based on record review, interview, review of the McGeer's Infection Symptom Tracking criteria, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of two residents (Resident (R)71) reviewed for antibiotic use out of a sample of 24 residents received an antibiotic with justification for its use. This had the potential for R71 to receive an antibiotic unnecessarily and could potentially contribute to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Antibiotic Stewardship - Review and Surveillance of Antibiotic Use and Outcomes dated 12/2016revealed, The purpose of our Antibiotic Stewardship Program is to monitor the use of antibiotics in our residents.Review of the McGeer Criteria for Infection Surveillance Checklist revealed,… […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF641Jun 10, 2024

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined that the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool used to facilitate the management of care, in accordance with federal guidelines for 1 of 21 residents, Resident #69 reviewed for accuracy for MDS coding. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: Reference: According to the latest version of the Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services - Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 Manual (updated October 2023) on Chapter 2-page 39 . According to the latest version of the Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services - Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 Manual (updated October 2023). This item documents the location to which the resident is being discharged at the time of discharge. […]

Read 20 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 20 of 40 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Apr 24, 2026Complaint1 finding
  • Sep 25, 2025Standard3 findings
  • Jun 10, 2024Standard3 findings
  • Dec 19, 2022Infection control1 finding
  • Aug 17, 2022Standard1 finding
  • May 4, 2022Infection control1 finding
  • Feb 26, 2020Standard1 finding
  • Mar 8, 2019Standard6 findings
Show the 8 earlier surveys
  • Nov 20, 2017Standard2 findings
  • Oct 7, 2016Standard1 finding
  • May 19, 2015Complaint1 finding
  • Sep 24, 2014Complaint1 finding
  • Sep 18, 2014Standard6 findings
  • Nov 25, 2013—4 findings
  • Dec 13, 2012—4 findings
  • Sep 26, 2011—4 findings

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction