Wake Robin-Linden Nursing Home
Shelburne, Vermont · CCN 475056
6 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
- 12
- Surveys
- 6
- Harm or worse
- 0
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
No finding on record has been cited at harm level or above.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 33
- Ownership
- Non profit - Corporation
- Chain
- Independent
- County
- Chittenden
- Medicare-certified since
- 1998
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 4
- Health inspection
- 5
- Staffing
- 1
- Quality measures
- 4
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=4, floor 20).
Last survey on record
Jan 21, 2026
292 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Annual nurse turnover | 58.5% | 47.6% |
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
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D150.0% | E— | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B— | C150.0% |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Wake Robin-Linden Nursing Home, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF578Jan 21, 2026
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one of fourteen sampled residents (Resident #6) medical record clearly communicated the resident's choice of code status to staff responsible for the resident's care. Findings include:Per record review, Resident #6 has a COLST (Clinician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) dated [DATE] which states Resident #6 is a DNR (do not resuscitate) and that CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, an emergency technique to restart breathing) should not be attempted, but that s/he might have a natural death. The Resident does not want to be intubated or ventilated, and s/he wishes treatment needed for comfort. Patient prefers no transfer to hospital for life-sustaining treatments. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF678Jun 22, 2022
Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to have appropriate policies directing staff when to initiate basic life support by not ensuring documentation of a resident and their representative's choice to have emergency basic life support immediately when needed for one of twelve sampled residents (Resident #2). Findings include: Per review of Resident #2's physician's orders [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . The facility policy CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) states: In the event of a cardiac or pulmonary arrest, Wake [NAME] provides CPR according to physician orders [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF842Jun 22, 2022
Based on staff interview and record review the facility failed to ensure resident allergies were consistently identified throughout the resident's medical record for one of three residents sampled (Resident #6). Findings include: Per record review Resident #6's Physicians Orders lists allergies of raw apples, raw pitted fruit, and Aleve. These allergies are also listed in the resident's medication administration record. Per the Guidelines for Daily Care (tool used to inform Licensed Nursing Assistants (LNAs) of each resident's specific care needs) lists Allergies as Raw Apples, Raw Pitted Fruits, Aleve Review of Resident #6's care plan date 4/11/2022 reflects that she/he may need an epi [[MEDICATION(S)]] pen may have life threatening allergic reaction to peanuts and hazelnuts or pitted… […]
- No harm, potential for minimal, widespreadF730Aug 2, 2023
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a performance review at least once every 12 months for every Licensed Nurse Assistant (LNA) and then must provide regular in-service education based on the outcome of these reviews for 5 of 5 LNA's in the sample. Findings include: During review of a random selection of 5 employee personnel files, 5 of 5 LNA files reviewed did not have evidence of annual performance review within the last 12 months. Per interview on 8/1/23 at 11:00AM, the Administrator confirmed that the facility had not conducted the required performance reviews for the LNA's.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Jan 21, 2026Standard1 finding
- Aug 2, 2023Standard1 finding
- Jun 22, 2022Standard2 findings
- Dec 17, 2014Complaint1 finding
- May 21, 2014Standard1 finding
- Mar 23, 2011—6 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