Agawam North Rehab And Nursing

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.

52.5% 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 214 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 44.4% 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 54 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 124 beds and averages 111.0 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 13 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 3.65 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.32 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.74 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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.

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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2025-04-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary facility kitchen and on two units (A-Wing and F-Wing) out of four units observed. Specifically, the facility failed to: -ensure Dietary Staff adhered to the hair restraint policy to minimize the potential for physical contamination during food preparation and meal service in the main facility kitchen. -label, date and store foods in the facility kitchen to decrease potential for food contamination and food-borne illnesses. -ensure that outside windows to the facility kitchen had screens to prevent pests/rodents from entering. -maintain and store food service equipment in a clean and sanitary manner in the main facility kitchen and on A-Wing and F-Wing units. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Staff Attire, revised 10/2023, indicated all employees wear approved attire for the performance of their duties. The Staff Attire policy also included the following: -All staff members will have their hair off their shoulders, confined in a hair net or cap, and facial…

  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 · E2025-04-09 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — pattern
  Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
  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 interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that six Residents (#2, #45, #48, #108, #3 and #9) and/or their Resident Representatives were afforded the right to participate in the scheduled interdisciplinary (IDT) care plan meetings, out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -For Resident #2, Resident #45, and Resident #108, ensure quarterly IDT care plan meetings occurred and that the Resident was invited to participate in the meetings. -For Resident #48, ensure quarterly IDT care plan meetings occurred and the Resident and/or Resident Representative were invited to participate in the meetings. -For Resident #3, and Resident #9, ensure IDT care plan meetings occurred and the Resident and/or Resident Representative were invited to participate in the meetings. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Plans, revised 11/20/24, indicated the following: -The resident, the resident's family and/or the legal representative/guardian or…

  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 · E2025-04-09 · tag F0576 — pattern
  Ensure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that four Resident's (#12, #6, #45 and #84), out of a total sample of 23 residents, had the right to privacy when receiving letters, packages and other materials delivered to the facility via postal services. Specifically, for Resident's #12, #6, #45 and #84, the facility failed to ensure that mail addressed to the Residents' was delivered unopened. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Communication Rights, revised on 11/5/24, indicated the following in part: -The resident has the right to send and receive mail and to receive letters, packages and other materials delivered to the facility for the resident through a means other than a Postal Service including the right to privacy . During a Resident Council Meeting held on 4/7/25 from 10:00 until 10:50 A.M., the following was discussed: -Resident #12 said he/she had received his/her mail opened about two weeks ago. Resident #12 said the opened mail was a letter from his/her doctor's office and that the facility did not have the right to open 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-04-09 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  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 review, the facility failed to ensure that there was sufficient nursing staff to assist residents in attaining and maintaining the highest practicable physical, mental, and psycho-social well-being on four units (A-Wing, C-Wing, D-Wing, and F-Wing), out of a total of four units, and for three Residents (#51, #45, and #13), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, 1. The facility failed to ensure that staffing levels on the A-Wing, C-Wing, D-Wing and F-Wing were provided to meet the residents needs of each unit safely. 2. For Resident #51, the facility failed to ensure toileting assistance was provided promptly when the Resident was indisposed and had the call light on for over 20 minutes. 3. For Resident #45, the facility failed to provide assistance of two staff with transfers as required resulting in a fall when the Resident was transferred with one staff memebr. 4. For Resident #13, the facility failed to provide timely notification to the Physician…

  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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  2. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility in October 2023 with diagnoses including Dementia and Type 2 Diabetes. Review of the Resident's clinical record indicated the Consultant Pharmacist had recommendations for the following dates and noted to refer to the report for details on: -9/19/24 -11/20/24 -12/18/24 -1/23/25 Further review of the Resident's clinical record failed to indicate documented evidence on what the Consultant Pharmacist recommendations were or that the recommendations were addressed by the facility and/or the Physician. On 4/9/25 at 2:21 P.M., the surveyor requested the Consultant Pharmacy Recommendations for Resident #23 from the DON. During an interview on 4/9/25 at 5:20 P.M., the Administrator said he was unable to find evidence of the Consultant Pharmacist's Recommendations made on 9/19/24, 11/20/24, 12/18/24 and on 1/23/25 and whether the recommendations were addressed by the facility and/or the Physician. 3. Resident #48 was admitted to the facility in November 2024 with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease, Depression and Dementia. Review of 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · 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 observations, interviews and records reviewed, the facility failed to provide a dignified existence for two Resident's (#9 and #17), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. ensure that Resident #9 had appropriate clothing to wear while out of his/her room. 2. For Resident #17, ensure dressing assistance was provided in accordance with the Resident's preference to be washed and fully dressed by 6:00 A.M., when the Resident required assistance from staff with dressing needs. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Rights, revised 11/5/24, indicated it was the policy of the facility to respect the rights of the residents by providing comprehensive care with an approach aimed at maintaining dignity while respecting the core rights of patients and residents . The policy also included the following: -the facility supports the resident's right to knowledgeably participate in decisions concerning their healthcare and medical treatment . Review of…

  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 · D2025-04-09 · tag F0551 — isolated
  Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to uphold resident rights for one Resident (#13), out of a total sample of 23 residents, relative to rights exercised by the Resident's Representative (RR #1). Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #13's Representative with a copy of the Resident's medical record when RR #1 was exercising the Resident's right to review a copy of the medical records, and the medical records were requested through the appropriate process from the facility by RR #1. Findings include: Review of the facility's HIPPA Notice of Privacy Practices, undated, from the Office of Civil Rights, indicated the following: -Rights that you have regarding your protected health information: >Access to your protected health information- you have the right to copy and/or inspect much of the protected health information that we retain on your behalf. >For protected health information that we maintain in any electronic designated record set, you may request a copy of such health information in a reasonable electronic format, if readily producible.…

  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 · D2025-04-09 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to act upon, provide timely responses, and document written responses and rationale to grievances of resident care and services brought to facility administration by the Resident Council. Specifically, the facility failed to promptly respond to resident grievances relative to laundry delays, loss and errors. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident and Family Concerns and Grievances, revised on 10/5/24, indicated the following in part: -Residents or their family members, guardian, or representative may voice a grievance to the facility staff in person, by telephone or via written communication. -The facility shall provide a grievance report form to facilitate the voicing of a grievance if requested by a resident or family member the facility compliance and ethics officer or a designated staff will document and keep a log of all grievances expressed either orally and or in writing on the day that it is received or as soon as possible after the event or events that precipitated the grievance. -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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that advanced directives were honored for one Resident (#2), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #2, the facility failed to ensure that the Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST: legal document that allows individuals to communicate their preferences for life-sustaining treatment to healthcare providers) form and Physician's orders accurately reflected the Resident/Resident Representative's wishes putting the Resident at risk for being resuscitated (perform full measures including cardiopulmonary resuscitation and intubation) when the advanced directive wishes were for no resuscitation (do not resuscitate [DNR] and intubate [DNI]). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Advanced Directives, dated 10/16/23, indicated it was the policy for the facility to ensure the residents' right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate or refuse in experimental research and to formulate an advance directive. The policy also included 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0623 — isolated
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman in writing, of a transfer or discharge for three Residents (#58, #13 and #47), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide written notification to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman: 1. For Resident #58, when the Resident was transferred out of the facility to the hospital on 3/11/25. 2. For Resident #13, when the Resident was transferred out of the facility to the hospital on 3/27/25. 3. For Resident #47, when the Resident was transferred out of the facility to the hospital on 3/8/25. Findings include: During an interview on 4/3/25 at 2:35 P.M. (prior to the start of survey), the Ombudsman said that she did not receive Discharge/Transfer notices from the facility. 1. Resident #58 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, Congestive Heart Failure and Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA -Stroke). Review of Resident #58's medical record indicated the Resident was sent to…

  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

$86,130 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $86,130 — penalty dated 2025-04-09

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 STERN CONSULTANTS — 22 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 44 rows in the source record cover these 19 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 organizational owners 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 $2.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% 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