Top State Directories

  • New Jersey Nursing Homes
  • Pennsylvania Nursing Homes
  • New York Nursing Homes
  • Florida Nursing Homes
  • Texas Nursing Homes
  • California Nursing Homes

More State Directories

  • Ohio Nursing Homes
  • Illinois Nursing Homes
  • Massachusetts Nursing Homes
  • Delaware Nursing Homes
  • Connecticut Nursing Homes
  • Maryland Nursing Homes

Popular City Markets

  • SNFs in Edison, NJ
  • SNFs in Philadelphia, PA
  • SNFs in Newark, NJ
  • SNFs in New York, NY
  • SNFs in Miami, FL
  • SNFs in Chicago, IL

More City Markets

  • SNFs in Pittsburgh, PA
  • SNFs in Trenton, NJ
  • SNFs in Houston, TX
  • SNFs in Cleveland, OH
  • SNFs in Boston, MA
  • SNFs in Wilmington, DE
Ownership & Enforcement TransparencyNJ Accountability ReportPA Accountability ReportNY Accountability ReportFL Accountability ReportSuggest a feature →

No sponsored placements. No referral fees. How we score →

Rankings are based on CMS Provider Data only. Placet receives no compensation from facilities. Data may be delayed — verify current details directly with each facility before acting.

Terms
Placet
Care HubSearchResourcesFamily GuidesTransparencyBuild logAbout

Methodology

Dual-Status Campuses

Some nursing facilities share a physical campus — and often a corporate operator — with a long-term care setting that sits outside federal CMS oversight. We call these dual-status campuses, and they matter for continuity of care research and accountability tracing.

What dual-status means

A dual-status campus has at least two distinct licensed settings — typically a federally-certified Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) alongside one or more state-regulated components such as an Assisted Living Facility (ALF), a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC), or a Community-Based Residential Facility (CBRF).

The SNF portion holds a Medicare and/or Medicaid certification number (CCN) and is therefore subject to federal CMS oversight: annual health inspections, quarterly staffing reporting via PBJ, quality measure reporting, and civil monetary penalty authority. The non-SNF portion is licensed only at the state level, with oversight intensity that varies widely by state.

Why we surface it

Structural accountability

When the same operator runs both the SNF and the adjacent LTC building, the management culture, staffing philosophies, and financial pressures flow across the whole campus. A history of federal deficiencies or CMP penalties is a meaningful signal about leadership priorities — not just about a discrete licensed unit.

Continuity of care

Dual-status campuses often market themselves on the ability to "age in place." A family placing a parent in the SNF after a hospitalization may be implicitly choosing a long-term home. Understanding what the neighboring buildings are — and who runs them — is essential context.

Operator transition risk

REIT sale-leaseback structures and management-company turnover often affect an entire campus at once. Tracking these transitions is the purpose of our operator history records — a new operator may have no prior CMS deficiency record yet share a campus with a facility that has a long enforcement history.

How we detect dual-status campuses

We use three signals in combination. A match on any two of the three is sufficient to flag a campus relationship:

  1. Operator match — the same corporate operator or management company appears in our ownership records for both the SNF and the adjacent facility.
  2. Parcel or address match — both facilities share the same tax parcel ID, or their geocoded addresses are within 50 meters of each other.
  3. Facility name proximity — the two facility names share a significant stem (e.g., “Riverside Health Center” and “Riverside Assisted Living”), used as a tiebreaker when operator or parcel data is incomplete.

We store detected campus relationships in the sibling_facility_ids column on the facility record. This is a machine-suggested relationship — we do not have a human-verified ground truth for every campus in our coverage area.

What we cannot tell you

  • •LTC staffing levels. Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) staffing data is collected only for Medicare/Medicaid-certified beds. State-regulated ALF and residential units are not included.
  • •LTC deficiency history — unless the state publishes it. New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York have varying levels of public disclosure for ALF inspections. We surface what is available and flag gaps explicitly.
  • •Quality ratings for non-SNF components. The CMS 5-star rating system applies only to certified SNFs. We do not publish star ratings or composite scores for ALF or CBRF settings.
  • •Whether the campus relationship is current. Operator transitions can dissolve a dual-status relationship. Our detection is based on the most recent data refresh; we do not back-date campus separations.

Notable operator transitions on dual-status campuses

REIT sale-leaseback transactions frequently involve entire campuses rather than individual licensed units. A few recurring patterns in our coverage area:

  • —Diversified Healthcare Trust (DHC) / ABG Senior Living transitions — multiple NJ and PA campuses where the SNF operator changed while the affiliated ALF retained a prior management company for a period.
  • —Ventas / Brookdale Senior Living — following the Brookdale-HCP portfolio restructuring, several CCRC campuses split their SNF and IL/AL wings across different operators. We track the split in operator history records.
  • —Private equity roll-ups — some PE-backed operators acquire both the SNF license and the adjacent ALF license as a package. Rapid re-sale or bankruptcy can leave the LTC wing with an unknown successor operator while the SNF continues reporting to CMS.

We store point-in-time operator transitions in our facility_operator_history table. Researchers and reporters can request export of this data for specific campuses.

Related methodology

  • Federal oversight — what CMS data covers
  • State-regulated facilities — coverage by state
  • Trust Index — how we score federally-certified SNFs
← Back to Transparency