Marlborough Health & Rehabilitation Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

56.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 112 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 42 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 31% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 109.1 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.08 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.59 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.42 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

38 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-01-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure that a cognitively impaired resident who had wandering behaviors that included wandering into other resident's rooms, and laying in other residents beds had interventions in place to ensure the resident was free from sexual abuse. The failures resulted in a finding of Immediate Jeopardy. The findings include: 1. Resident #2 had diagnoses including vascular dementia with anxiety, major depressive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. A care plan dated 11/6/24 identified that the resident had a behavior problem because of using sexual language at times with interventions that directed to encourage the resident to express feelings appropriately, monitor behavioral episodes and determine underlying cause, administer medications as ordered, and psychiatric consults as needed. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS)…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation (video), interviews, and record/policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 remained free from abuse when Nurse Aide (NA) #1 deliberately struck the resident's head during transport to the resident's room on 03/12/2026 at ~5:51 PM, causing an actual psychosocial outcome (yelling with audible distress) to a severely cognitively impaired resident (BIMS=6). Specifically, the video shows NA #1 entering the room, striking the top of the resident's cap, then striking the left side of the resident's head with the left hand while passing the roommate's bed; a loud noise is heard immediately before the resident yells. The facility's Abuse Policy prohibits willful infliction of injury, intimidation, or punishment resulting in physical harm, pain, or mental anguish, yet NA #1's actions violated this requirement. While RN #1 assessed no physical injury and the facility notified the DNS and police and removed NA #1, the resident nonetheless experienced actual psychosocial harm under the…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-06-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was properly positioned in a wheelchair while being transported by staff. The resident fell from the wheelchair and suffered multiple serious injuries including a fractured tibia and fibula. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbances, difficulty in walking, abnormalities of gait (walking) and mobility (the ability to move or be moved from one place to another) and muscle weakness. A Fall Evaluation dated 8/5/23 identified that although Resident #1 was not a fall risk, he/she had the potential for a fall with/without injury. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8), required substantial assistance for toileting, personal hygiene…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-24 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation/policies and interviews, for two (2) of four (4) sampled residents (Residents #1 and #4) who required staff assistance for personal care, the facility failed to ensure Residents #1 and #4 were protected from verbal abuse by a staff member when the staff member repeatedly made inappropriate, offensive comments. The findings include:1.Resident #1's diagnoses included Parkinsons Disease, mood disorder, psychotic disorder with hallucinations, anxiety, and depression.The annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of (15) and required moderate assistance from staff for personal care including incontinence care.The Resident Care Plan dated 5/13/26 identified Resident #1 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Interventions directed personal care with each incontinent episode, ensure an unobstructed path to the bathroom, check every two (2) hours for incontinence…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation/policies, and staff interviews, for one (1) of one (1) sampled resident (Resident #6) reviewed for management and monitoring of hypertension, the facility failed to report elevated blood pressures to the physician and failed to establish clear parameters for reporting abnormal blood pressure readings in the absence of specific physician orders. The findings include:Resident #6's diagnoses included hypertension, intracerebral hemorrhage, acute respiratory failure hypoxia with tracheostomy, hemiplegia, and seizures.Physician's orders dated 4/9/25 directed all medications be administered through the gastrostomy tube (g-tube). Medications for hypertension included Amlodipine ten (10) milligrams (mg) one (1) tablet daily, carvedilol 6.25 mg every twelve (12) hours, clonidine HCl 0.2 mg every 12 hours, hydralazine 50 mg every four (4) hours, spironolactone 12.5 mg 1 tablet daily, and losartan potassium 100 mg 1 tablet daily.Documented blood pressures identified…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, interviews, video footage, and facility documentation/guidelines, for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to prevent unauthorized visual and audio access of Resident #1's care, interactions, and environment after the installation and use of video monitoring. The findings included:Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in December of 2024 and had diagnoses which included dementia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and anxiety disorder. The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as severely cognitively impaired (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6), required supervision/touch assistance with toileting, dressing, and personal hygiene and use of a wheelchair for transport. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 1/9/26 identified Resident #1 had the potential to be physically and verbally aggressive related to dementia with poor impulse control and psychotropic…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy, and interviews, for one (1) of one (1) sampled resident (Resident #6) reviewed for an acute change in condition, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and monitoring for a dependent resident experiencing an acute change in condition after Emergency Medical Services (EMS) was activated. This failure resulted in the resident being left unattended despite a compromised medical status, placing the resident at risk for aspiration and airway compromise. The findings include:Resident #6's diagnoses included hypertension, intracerebral hemorrhage, acute respiratory failure hypoxia with tracheostomy, hemiplegia, gastrostomy tube feed, and seizures.The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #6 was severely cognitively impaired and unable to make reasonable and consistent decisions regarding tasks of daily living (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2), was dependent on all care including…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, staff interviews, camera footage, and facility documentation, for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards, the facility failed to ensure leg rests were in place during an assisted wheelchair transport. This failure placed the resident at risk for injury. The findings included:Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 and had diagnoses which included dementia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and anxiety disorder.Review of the Wheelchair Competency for NA #1 dated 7/29/25 identified he/she had successfully performed all competency elements, which included to ensure the resident's feet were placed safely on the footrests.The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as severely cognitively impaired (Brief Mental Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 6), required supervision/touch assistance with toileting, dressing, and personal hygiene and use of a manual wheelchair for…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-21 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to ensure an assessment was performed and a provider was notified of a change in condition after multiple reports of a change in condition was made by facility staff over an 11 day period of time. The findings include:Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, abnormalities of gait, and muscle weakness. Physician's orders dated 5/21/25 directed Physical Therapy five (5) times per week for six (6) weeks and Occupational Therapy five (5) times per week for six (6) weeks.The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired, required maximum assistance for hygiene, showers, and bed mobility, was dependent on staff for dressing, toileting, transfers, and ambulation, and used a wheelchair for mobility. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 5/24/25 identified Resident #1 had a…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-21 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for two of three sampled residents (Residents #2 and Resident #3) who were reviewed for an allegation of resident-to-resident sexual abuse, the facility failed to provide adequate monitoring for a resident who had a history of wandering and was observed by facility staff wandering into other resident rooms. The findings include:1. Resident #2's diagnoses included dementia, anxiety, and difficulty ambulating. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 5/13/25 identified Resident #2 had a self-care deficit and wandered throughout the unit and in and out of other residents' rooms. Interventions directed to offer structured activities, comfort support and redirection when wandering into other residents' rooms. The annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #2 had severe memory recall deficits (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2), required maximum assistance from staff for eating, hygiene,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-24 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #6) reviewed for a resident-to-resident altercation, the facility failed to ensure Resident #6 was free from physical abuse. The findings include:Resident #6's diagnoses included post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, dementia, psychotic disorder with delusions, and moderate intellectual disabilities. The RCP dated 7/4/24 identified Resident #6 is selective with leisure time pursuits and needs moderate encouragement. Interventions identified: provide in room activities to promote mental stimulation and added socialization, resident may have childlike personality, may be attention seeking, and likes to hold stuffed animals/toys. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #6 had severe cognitive impairment and required supervision or touching assistance for bed mobility and transfers, required substantial/maximal…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the clinical record, facility documentation, facility policy and interviews for one (1) of three (3) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for falls, the facility failed to ensure the resident was assessed by a Registered Nurse (RN), after a fall with major injury, prior to being moved by staff. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbances, difficulty in walking, abnormalities of gait (walking) and mobility (the ability to move or be moved from one place to another) and muscle weakness. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had moderately impaired cognition (Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8), required substantial assistance for toileting, personal hygiene and transfers and required partial assistance for bed mobility. The MDS identified Resident #1 did not exhibit behaviors. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 5/31/25 identified Resident #1 was at risk for falls related to increased…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, facility policy review, and interviews for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with respect and dignity. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, anxiety and bipolar disorder. The quarterly MDS Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified that Resident #1 was alert and oriented, with no behaviors and required maximal assistance with ADLs. The Resident Care Plan (RCP) dated 6/26/2024 identified Resident #1 had an ADL self-care performance deficit related to weakness, cognitive impairment and dementia. Interventions directed assist with ADLs. Review of facility Reportable Events Form dated 9/4/2024 identified that while the ADNS was providing care to another resident across the hall from Resident #1, the ADNS overheard an aide tell the resident, I can say hi to whoever I want. Shut up! NA #1's written statement dated 9/4/2024 identified that…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$206,228 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $10,868 — penalty dated 2025-06-20
• $195,360 — penalty dated 2025-01-07

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES — 42 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $3.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 25% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in CT