Life Care Center of Acton

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.

51.9% 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 180 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 81.2% 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 96 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 51% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 155 beds and averages 120.7 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 34 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.04 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.30 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 3.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.28 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

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.

16 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2022-12-15 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, policy review, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff provided necessary treatment and services, according to professional standard of practice, to promote healing of a facility acquired (FA) deep tissue pressure injury (DTPI- persistent non-blanchable deep red, maroon or purple discoloration resulting from intense and/or prolonged pressure and shear forces at the bone-muscle interface) for one Resident (#15) out of two applicable sampled residents, out of 22 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure its staff: 1) implemented a Physician-directed treatment order for a FA DTPI within a timely manner when the DTPI was identified on the Resident's right heel and communicated to the Physician, 2) assessed the FA DTPI within a timely manner once it was identified, 3) consulted the Physician for a recommended treatment change for the Resident's DTPI, 4) consulted the Physician for a treatment change prior to implementing the change, and 5) consulted the Physician regarding the Resident's response to 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-07-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to prevent the development and potential transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that water testing for Legionella was completed at least annually placing facility residents at risk for exposure to Legionella Bacterium (bacteria which lives in fresh water and can cause pneumonia-like or flu-like illnesses). Findings include: Review of the facility's Water Management Program, reviewed 5/20/25, included but was not limited to the following: -Environmental Risk Management Program procedures = Legionella Testing -Control Measure = Test quarterly or annually -Procedure = Make sure water samples are tested and are within guidelines. During an interview on 7/17/25 at 7:55 A.M., the Maintenance Director said he was responsible for the Water Management Program in the facility. The Maintenance Director said that Legionella testing had not been conducted…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-21 · tag F0685 — isolated
  Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
  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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure proper treatment relative to the Resident's vision was obtained in a timely manner for one Resident (#6) out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to assist Resident #6 in scheduling a follow-up ophthalmology appointment for greater than seven months, after the Resident was evaluated and recommendation made by the Ophthalmologist for cataract surgery to his/her left eye, increasing the Resident's risk for further visual decline.Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Vision and Hearing Assistive Devices, dated 6/8/20 and reviewed 9/19/24, indicated the following:-The facility's policy was to ensure residents receive proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain vision and hearing abilities. -The facility will assist as needed with making appointments and arranging transportation to obtain needed services. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility in July 2023 with diagnoses…

  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 · D2024-05-28 · tag F0742 — isolated
  Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
  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 record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide mental health services for two Residents (#60 and #2) out of a total sample of 25 residents, with a documented history of mental health concerns. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure its staff: 1. followed the facility Suicidal Precaution policy when Resident #60 had expressed suicidal ideation to staff members. 2. provided timely Behavioral Health Services for Resident #2 who was expressing multiple depressive symptoms during the comprehensive assessment. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy for Suicide Precautions, last reviewed 8/22/23, indicated that when a Resident has an expression of an intent to commit suicide: - Complete the P4 Suicidality Screener (suicide risk assessment). - Report findings to the Director of Nursing, Executive Director, Social Services and attending Physician. - Make resident responsible party aware of risk and verbalizations. - Based on risk category, implement the following:…

  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 · D2024-05-28 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, and policies reviewed, the facility failed to offer the Pneumococcal Vaccination as recommended to two Residents (#2 and #50) out of five applicable residents, in a total sample of 25 residents, putting the Residents at risk for developing facility acquired Pneumonia. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that: 1. Resident #2 was offered an updated Pneumococcal vaccination within the appropriate timeframe as indicated by the CDC (Centers for Disease Control). 2. Resident #50 was offered any Pneumococcal vaccination after admission to the facility. Findings include: Review of the CDC website Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults greater than or equal to 65 years (cdc.gov), dated 3/15/23 indicated but was not limited to the following: - For adults 65 and over who have not had any prior pneumococcal vaccines, then the patient and provider may choose Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) 20 or PCV15 followed by Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV) 23 one year later. -For adults 65 and over who has had Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine 13…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2022-12-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff maintained a clean and sanitary environment in the kitchen where food items were stored and prepared for resident consumption. The facility also failed to ensure its staff adhered to food storage requirements in one of two nourishment kitchens and for one medication room refrigerator. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure its staff: 1) maintained equipment used for meal preparation that was clean and sanitary, 2) discarded outdated food items stored for resident consumption in the central nourishment kitchen freezers, and 3) monitored the temperature in one medication room refrigerator where resident food items were stored. Findings include: 1. The facility failed to ensure its staff maintained kitchen equipment used for meal preparation in a manner that was free of dried food and debris. Review of the facility's policy, titled Cleaning and Caring for Equipment, undated, included the following: - It was important for equipment used in Food and Nutrition Services to be clean. - Equipment…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff honored the rights of one Resident (#2) to formulate advanced directives (an individual's wishes regarding medical treatment), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the facility staff executed a Medical Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST - a medical order form that converts an individual's wishes regarding life-sustaining treatment into medical orders) form with the Resident's Representative, when the Resident continued to be capable of making their own health care decisions. Findings include: Review of the Facility policy titled Advanced Directives and Advanced Care Planning, revised 3/28/2022, indicated: -Residents have the right to self determination regarding their medical care. - .a resident should not be presumed incompetent unless a Physician renders an opinion of such . Resident #2 was admitted to the facility in June 2019. Review of the Resident's Health Care Proxy (HCP- a person that you trust as your proxy, or agent to express your wishes and make health care…

  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 · D2022-12-15 · 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

  Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff notified one Resident's (#15) responsible party of deterioration in the Resident's physical condition, out of 22 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure its staff notified the Resident's appointed guardian of: a) deterioration of the Resident's right heel wound and change in treatment ordered by the Physician when the wound was identified to have deteriorated, and b) a change in skin condition to the Resident's sacrum (bony structure at the base of the spine/ backbone) that required a new treatment intervention to commence. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, titled Changes in Resident's Condition or Status, dated 8/18/22, included the following: - The facility would notify a resident's representative of changes in the resident's condition or status. - The facility was required to notify a resident's representative of deterioration in a resident's health .or to commence a new form of treatment. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility in January 2008…

  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 · D2022-12-15 · tag F0638 — isolated
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff completed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in a timely manner, for two Residents (#4 and #57), out of 22 sampled residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in March 2022. Review of a quarterly MDS assessment indicated the assessment reference date (ARD) was 11/8/22 and the assessment was completed on 12/7/22 (past the 14 day required timeline for completion). 2. Resident #57 was admitted to the facility in July 2021. Review of a quarterly MDS assessment indicated the ARD was 11/8/22 and the assessment was completed on 12/10/22 (past the 14 day required timeline for completion). During an interview on 12/13/22 at 2:19 P.M., the Assistant Director of Nurses (ADON) reviewed the transmittal record for both assessments and said they were completed later than the required timeline.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff accurately coded Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two Residents (#15 and #2). Specifically, the facility failed to ensure its staff coded: 1) Resident #15's deep tissue pressure injury (DTPI - persistent non-blanchable deep red, maroon or purple discoloration resulting from intense and/or prolonged pressure and shear forces at the bone-muscle interface) when the Resident had developed a DTPI during the observation period for the MDS assessment, and 2) Resident #2's fall that was sustained since the prior MDS assessment. Findings include: 1. For Resident #15, the facility failed to ensure its staff accurately coded one MDS assessment to reflect he/she had a DTPI when the Resident had developed a DTPI during the observation period for the MDS assessment. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility in January 2008. Review of a Physician Progress Note, dated 10/24/22, included that the Unit Manager (UM) reported some changes on…

  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 · D2022-12-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its staff developed and implemented a comprehensive care plan for one Resident (#304) with a gastrostomy tube (G-tube - a tube that is placed directly into the stomach through an abdominal wall incision for the enteral administration of food, fluids and medication), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1) develop a comprehensive care plan relative to weight monitoring, and 2) implement Physician orders relative to documentation of gastric residual volume (GRV- the volume of stomach contents that can be aspirated through the G-tube using a syringe). Findings include: Resident #304 was admitted to the facility in November 2022 with diagnoses including gastrostomy tube, Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and Malnutrition. 1) Review of the Resident's current care plan, revised by the Registered Dietician (RD) 12/13/22 included a care plan focus indicating: - that the Resident required G-tube feeding related to Dysphagia, and Malnutrition And a care plan goal…

  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

“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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 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 32 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

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.

This home reported $1.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% 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 MA