Search for Skilled Nursing by ZIP Code:  :

Apple Rehab Farmington Valley

  1. Home
  2. Skilled Nursing Home Facilities Directory
  3. Connecticut (CT)
  4. Plainville
Full Name

Phone Number

Email Address

City of interest
We value your privacy. By clicking, you agree to the terms and conditions of our privacy policy. You also consent that we can reach out to you using a phone system that can auto-dial numbers. Your consent is not required to use our service.

Search for nursing homes in your area

ZIP:

Reviews
Overall Rating 3.4 / 5.0 ★★★★★

  • ★★★★★ a week ago

    I can't say enough good things about Apple Rehab Farmington Valley. My mom received excellent care and the residents' rooms are private and very spacious! No other building we toured had such large, private rooms. We especially loved the cafe/bistro, which made it feel more like a hotel than a nursing home! I highly recommend Apple Rehab if you are looking for a caring and attentive rehab facility!

  • ★★★★★ a week ago

    My mother has been there for 2 1/2 years. She is very happy. She enjoys the food, thinks the place is well kept and appreciates the friendliness of all of the staff. I think so, too. They take very good care of her.

  • ★★★★★ 5 months ago

    My Grandmother in-law was a resident at Apple rehab Farmington Valley for 5 years. I cannot begin to give enough praise to all of those that cared for her. She passed away in March of this year with loving staff at her side. The nurses aides and nurses became her second family. She loved them all dearly. When she needed a splint on her hand due to contractures rehab came right away to evaluate her and get her a splint to ease her pain. In the last 9 months of her life she refused to leave her room. The recreation staff visited with her on a regular basis to provide her with stimulation. Sometimes with music , sometimes with gentle touch and sometimes just chit chat. She loved the food and all of the staff that cared for her. She had a great sense of humor and when visiting I would see the great interaction and the laughter that was shared with staff. I cannot recommend this facility enough. I have such deep gratitude toward everyone that made her quality of life the best it could be. Thank you to all of them!

  • ★★★★★ 5 months ago

    One of my acquaintances has resided at Apple Rehab in Plainville for over a month now. The care this individual has received has been the Upmost Professional on Every level of Job Titles. Upon getting a release date, the Physical Therapists, Themselves, came to my acquaintance's home to assess the ability for this individual to live Independently. I, Personally, have been a c.n.a for 30+ years. I have worked in facilities from 5 star to 1. All of the skilled caregivers have provided my acquaintance with the Highest levels of Respect. I have visited Apple Rehab now for this residents entire stay. Each and Every staff member: From Administration, D.O.N, to Kitchen, Should be Acknowledged for their Upheld Compassion. I Believe Apple Rehab is, most Definitely a 5 Star facility.

  • ★★★★★ a year ago

    The last thing your family needs is a weed smelling nurse sitting on the front desk doing nothing when ppl needs them. We are so out of here. Save your money and look for a facility that would really care about your love ones.

About Apple Rehab Farmington Valley

General Information

Legal Business NamePlainville Health Care Ctr. Inc.
Ownership TypeFor Profit - Corporation
Changed Ownership In The Last 12 MonthsNo
First Accepted MedicareJanuary 1, 1967 ()
Capacity173
Residents109
Percent Occupied63%
Program ParticipationMedicare And Medicaid
Resident And Family CouncilsResident
In HospitalNo
Continuing Care Retirement CommunityNo
Special Focus FacilityNo
Auto Sprinkler System In Required AreasYes

Ratings for Apple Rehab Farmington Valley

Apple Rehab Farmington Valley
was reviewed by to have a rating of 2 out of 5. About Medicare Ratings
Overall Rating
Health Inspections Rating
Quality Measures Rating
Staff Rating
RN Staff Rating

Overall Ratings of Connecticut Nursing Homes

Fines, Complaints, and Inspection Problems in the Past 3 Years

Compare The Number of Problems

Types of Problems at Nursing Homes

Some issues within a nursing home are much more severe than others. Medicare evaluates each problem based on 2 scales: the number of residents affected by a problem and the severity of the potential or actual harm to residents based on the problem. We have color coded the matrix below to make it easier to pick out the more severe problems. In general, orange and red issues related to the treatment of a resident are considered substandard quality of care.

  Residents Affected
Severity of the Deficiency Few Some Many
Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety J K L
Actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy G H I
No actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy D E F
No actual harm with potential for minimal harm A B C

April 7, 2016 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaint+InspectionEnsure residents maintain acceptable nutritional status.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionMaintain drug records and properly mark/label drugs and other similar products according to accepted professional standards.

February 17, 2015 - 3 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
---Fine$1,950 fine
GFewActual HarmComplaint+InspectionEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provide adequate supervision to prevent avoidable accidents.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaint+InspectionDevelop a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaint+InspectionProvide necessary care and services to maintain or improve the highest well being of each resident .
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionGive each resident enough fluids to keep them healthy and prevent dehydration.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionGive the right treatment and services to residents who display physical or psychosocial problems adapting to changes in circumstances.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program for mentally-ill and mentally-retarded patients.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionEnsure that each resident who enters the nursing home without a catheter is not given a catheter, unless medically necessary, and that incontinent patients receive proper services to prevent urinary tract infections and restore normal bladder functions.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionEnsure residents maintain acceptable nutritional status.

Staffing Levels Per Resident per Day

Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Apple Rehab Farmington Valley require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.

2hr 35min
2hr 35min
ReportedExpected
CNA
45min
40min
ReportedExpected
LPN
40min
1hr 5min
ReportedExpected
RN
4hr 5min
4hr 20min
ReportedExpected
Total Nursing

This facility also provides approximately 45min per resident per WEEK of physical therapist time.

Quality Measures for Long Stay Residents

96.6%
94.8%
94.8%
94.8%
94.8%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
89.2%
91.7%
92.7%
96.6%
94.7%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
67.6%
64.0%
59.3%
50.0%
45.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
24.4%
26.8%
30.0%
23.9%
21.8%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antianxiety or hypnotic medication
16.5%
22.2%
28.4%
22.4%
19.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
21.7%
21.7%
17.3%
18.4%
16.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
7.8%
11.3%
8.7%
21.1%
16.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
6.8%
5.5%
9.5%
9.4%
5.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
2.4%
2.6%
6.9%
2.5%
6.8%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
2.8%
1.4%
1.5%
2.8%
4.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of high risk long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
4.4%
2.6%
3.7%
4.6%
2.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
6.7%
1.2%
3.8%
3.4%
3.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
3.2%
0.0%
1.2%
1.1%
3.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of long-stay residents who were physically restrained

Quality Measures for Short Stay Residents

82.7%
83.1%
81.2%
84.4%
80.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
67.6%
74.5%
74.5%
74.5%
80.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of short-stay residents who were assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
73.5%
77.7%
71.6%
65.4%
66.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of short-stay residents who made improvements in function
27.0%
25.6%
25.6%
30.7%
15.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
1.1%
1.7%
2.2%
1.0%
1.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
1.1%
1.1%
1.3%
0.6%
0.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016CT
Percentage of short-stay residents with pressure ulcers that are new or worsened



Some page content retrieved from Google Places