Life Care Center Of Merrimack Valley
80 Boston Road, Billerica, MA 01862 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 124 certified beds · (978) 667-2166 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2024
- it has 4 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (27) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $161,920 in federal fines (most recent 2024-12-04)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
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.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.1% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.8% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 32.7% | 15.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.9% | 3.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 3.8% | 15.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.8% | 19.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.7% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 33.0% | 21.2% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.6% | 21.4% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 77.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.8% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.9% | 11.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.34 | 1.88 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.57 | 1.50 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
53.3% 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 239 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 90.8% 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 109 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 40% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 53.3%CMS range 44.7–61.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 8.1–13.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 90.8% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 81.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 87.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 5.5–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.98 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 124 beds and averages 111.6 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 12 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 4.09 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.39 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 3.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.29 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 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 39% 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.
27 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · H2024-12-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect 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 record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to protect three Residents (#97, #60 and #103), from neglect, out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically:1a. For Resident #97, the facility failed to provide care and treatment to prevent the development of pressure ulcers. Specifically, the facility failed to provide care and treatment resulting in the development of a stage 4 pressure injury to the sacrum resulting in the development of osteomyelitis requiring antibiotics treatment, surgical debridement, and multiple hospitalizations, and failed to arrange a wound clinic follow up.1b. For Resident #97, the facility failed to respond to and implement interventions when Resident #97 developed one deep tissue pressure injury to the left heel. 2. For Resident #60, the facility failed to implement treatments, physician orders, and care plan interventions resulting in the development of a Stage 3 pressure injury to the lower back requiring antibiotic treatment and hospitalization, and…
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.
- Actual harm · H2024-12-04 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — patternProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 provide care and treatment to prevent the development and worsening of pressure injury's (wounds that occur when the skin and tissue are damaged by prolonged pressure, usually on bony areas like the coccyx, hips, heels, or elbows) for four Residents (#103, #97, #60, and #20) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically:1. For Resident #103, facility failed to respond to and implement new interventions when Resident #103's wound worsened and developed signs and symptoms of infection. The facility also failed to arrange a wound clinic follow up as indicated by the Nurse Practitioner. 2a. For Resident #97, the facility failed to provide care and treatment to prevent the development of a Stage 4 pressure injury to the sacrum resulting in the development of osteomyelitis requiring antibiotics treatment, surgical debridement, and multiple hospitalizations and failed to arrange for a wound clinic follow up. 2b. For Resident #97, 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.
- Actual harm · H2024-12-04 · tag F0841 — patternDesignate a physician to serve as medical director responsible for implementation of resident care policies and coordination of medical care in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, document review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the medical director was responsible for the implementation of resident care policies and the coordination of the medical care in the facility. In addition, the facility failed to ensure the appropriateness and quality of medical care and medically related care provided to residents which resulted in worsening pressure wounds for two residents.Findings Include:Review of facility policy titled Medical Director, dated as reviewed 6/12/24, indicated the following:-Policy: The facility will have a designated medical director who is responsible for implementing care policies and coordinating medical care, and who is directly accountable for the management of the institution of which it is a distinct part.-The facility must designate a physician to serve as medical director. The medical director is responsible for (i) implementation of resident care policies; and (ii) the coordination of medical care in the facility.-Current professional standards of practice- Refers to approaches to care, procedures,…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-12-04 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure it completed a baseline care plan for one Resident (#60) out of 30 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan to address a surgical wound to the lower leg with a leg splint and failed to implement care plan interventions resulting in the development of a Stage 3 pressure injury to the lower back requiring antibiotic treatment and hospitalization, right buttock Stage 2 pressure injury, right lateral foot stage 1 pressure injury, right outer calf DTI (Deep Tissue Injury), and right heel DTI. The facility failed to respond to, and implement new interventions when Resident #60 developed new pressure injuries.Findings include:Resident #60 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, cellulitis of right lower limb, sepsis due to streptococcus group A, type one diabetes with foot ulcer, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, muscle weakness,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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 records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #2), who started to lose his/her balance during care, was lowered to the floor by a staff member, the Facility failed to ensure nursing notified the Provider and the Health Care Agent of the incident, a few days later Resident #2 was noted to have a decline in functional status and was experiencing pain with mobility. Findings include:Review of the Facility's policy titled, Changes in Resident's Condition or Status, revised August 2025 indicated:- The nurse will notify the residents' attending physician or physician on call and resident representative of changes in resident's condition or status and must notify the physician immediately of:An Accident involving the resident which has the potential for requiring physician intervention.Resident #2 was admitted to the Facility in October 2023, diagnoses included dementia, osteoporosis (bone density decreases, making bone weak, brittle and highly prone to fractures), hypertension, chronic kidney disease and a history of falls.Review of the Report…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#14) who required renal dialysis (a life sustaining treatment that helps the body remove extra fluids and waste products from the blood when the kidneys are not able to) out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, for Resident #14 the facility failed to ensure nursing scheduled his/her phosphate binder (medication that is essential for managing elevated phosphate levels in the blood, a condition known as hyperphosphatemia. This condition often occurs in residents with chronic kidney disease because their kidneys are less able to excrete phosphate. High phosphate levels can lead to various health issues, including weakened bones and cardiovascular problems) to be administered with meals and snacks as recommended by the dialysis center. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Hemodialysis Offsite Policy, dated as revised 9/16/25, indicated the facility assures that each resident receives care and services…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-12-10 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two Residents (#85 and #113) were free from significant medication errors, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically,1. For Resident #85, the facility failed to ensure Nurse #3 administered the correct dose of furosemide on twelve occasions.2. For Resident #113, the facility failed to ensure nursing transcribed the correct dose of lisinopril from his/her hospital discharge medication list resulting in Resident #113 receiving the incorrect dose of lisinopril on four occasions. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Administration of Medications, dated 9/9/25, indicated the facility will ensure medications are administered safety and appropriately per physician's order to address residents' diagnosis and signs and symptoms.2. Staff who are responsible for medication administration will adhere to the 10 rights of medication administration. c. Right Dose. Check the Medication Administration Record (MAR)…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biologicals in accordance with State and Federal laws. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure medications were dated once opened and stored according to manufacturer's guidelines in one of three medication carts observed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications and Biologicals, dated as revised 6/30/25, indicated policy 5.3 sets forth the procedures relating to the storage and expiration dates of medications, biologicals, syringes, and needles. 11. Once any medication or biological package is opened, facility should follow manufacturer/supplier guidelines with respect to expiration dates for opened medications. Facility staff should record the date opened on the primary medication container (i.e., vial, bottle, inhaler) when the medication has a shortened expiration date once opened or opened.11.1 Facility staff may record the calculated expiration date based on date opened on the primary medication container.11.2 Medications…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide one Resident (#93) with a therapeutic diet as ordered by the physician out of a total sample of 26 Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that Resident #93 received an easy to chew textured diet as prescribed by the physician.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Therapeutic and Modified Diets, dated and revised 12/5/23, indicated the following:- Therapeutic and modified diets will be provided by the attending physician or per state guidelines. The intent of this is to ensure the residents receive and consume foods in the appropriate consistency as prescribed by a physician.Review of the facility policy titled Nutrition Assessment, dated and revised 12/16/21, indicated the following:- The Registered Dietitian assesses the resident to determine nutritional needs by reviewing the collected data and completing the nutrition assessment. Nutrition Assessment also includes information such as any special…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-14 · tag F0552 — patternEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on records reviewed and interviews for three of three sampled residents (Resident #1, #2 and #3), whose Physician's Orders included the administration of psychotropic medications, the Facility failed to ensure that they obtained signed written consent for the administration of the medications, which include providing each resident and/or their Health Care Proxy with information related to the risks and benefits of the medications, prior to administering them.Findings include:Review of the Facility Policy Massachusetts Psychotropic Medication Written Consent Policy, dated as last reviewed 09/16/2024, indicated in order to meet Section 72BB's requirements for documenting informed consent, prior to the administration of any drug included on Attachment A (Schedule of Psychotropic Drugs), the Facility will complete the Departments prescribed form (Attachment B-Informed Consent for Psychotropic Administration Form), and prior to or upon administration, include the completed form in the resident's medical record.The Policy indicated to complete the form; the drug's prescriber must…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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, record review, staff education review, and Facility Assessment review, the facility failed to ensure the nursing staff were trained and demonstrated the competencies and skill sets necessary to provide the level and types of care and services needed as outlined in the Facility Assessment. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure the licensed nursing staff were trained and demonstrated competency to identify, assess, evaluate, intervene, and respond to a significant change in condition of a wound, for three Residents (#97, #60, #103), out of a total sample of 30 Residents. 2. Ensure that 31 out of 36 staff education records reviewed, had completed education and competencies and were completed and documented annually, per the Facility Assessment. As a result of these failures, three Residents (#97, #60, and #103) developed pressure injuries that worsened.Findings include:1. According to the Board of Registration in Nursing, 244 CMR 9.00 &10.00: Standards of Conduct, Definitions and…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 and interview the facility failed to properly follow sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the risk of foodborne illness in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Review of the facility policy titled Safe Food Handling, dated as revised 4/26/23, indicated the following: - All food purchased, stored, and distributed is handled with accepted food-handling practices and per federal, state and local requirements. - Associates shall wash their hands before handling or consuming food including working with clean equipment and utensils, and: - After handling soiled equipment or utensils - During food preparation, as often as necessary to remove soil and contamination and to prevent cross contamination when changing tasks - Before donning gloves to initiate a task that involved working with food - After engaging in any other activities that contaminate the hands - All food is handled carefully to avoid contamination with potentially harmful debris The surveyor made the following observations on 11/22/24 during the breakfast tray line…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — patternAdminister the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
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 it was administrated in a manner that enabled the facility to ensure that systems were in place to provide competent clinical care and clinical oversight for the treatment to prevent the development and worsening of pressure injuries. Specifically, the facility administrator failed to: 1. Provide nursing staff education, training and competencies to demonstrate competency in providing safe and effective wound care management.2. Identify concerns outlined by the Medical Director in the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program related to documentation, wound dressings, lab services and wound staging and documentation.3. Implement an effective wound care program that is supervised by a physician for pressure ulcer (wounds that occur when the skin and tissue are damaged by prolonged pressure, usually on bony areas like the hips, heels, or elbows) prevention and care per the Facility Assessment Tool. Findings…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0837 — patternEstablish a governing body that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies for managing and operating the facility and appoints a properly licensed administrator responsible for managing the facility.
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 interview, record review and the Facility Assessment, the facility failed to ensure the Governing Body provided oversight and accountability for quality of care related to comprehensive wound care management. Specifically:1. The Governing Body failed to ensure the facility provided consistent and effective nursing staff education and training to provide competent quality of care and effective wound care management as outlined per the Facility Assessment.2. The Governing Body failed to ensure the facility had implemented an effective wound care program that is supervised by a physician for pressure ulcer (wounds that occur when the skin and tissue are damaged by prolonged pressure, usually on bony areas like the hips, heels, or elbows) prevention and care.Review of the facility policy titled QAPI - Program Design and Scope, revised 10/21/22, last reviewed 10/24/24, indicated the following:- The authority for the planning and implementation of the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) program…
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.
Show the remaining 13 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — patternConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
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 Facility Assessment and interviews, the facility failed to conduct and document a facility wide assessment that accurately reflected the resources necessary to care for its residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure licensed nursing staff were competent in wound care. Findings include:Review of the Facility Assessment, dated as reviewed with the QAPI committee, in August 2024, indicated the following:-Facility Profile indicated the average daily census range: 103 - 108 Part 1 Facility Profile- Wound Care Manual Annual Review Date 7/5/23- Review of the diagnosis potentially treated at the facility include, Aphasia, Behavioral Health Disorders (Anxiety /Personality/ Dissociative), Bipolar Disorder, Blood Disorders-DVT, PE, Bleeding, Anemia, Sickle Cell, Bowel Disease- GERD, PUD, Crohn's Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Cancer Care- Prostate, Lung, Colon, Pancreatic, Breast Bone, Communication Barriers (Another Language, Aphasis), Congestive Heart Failure and other respiratory…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — patternHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program which addressed the full range of care and services, was comprehensive and data-driven, and focused on indicators of outcomes of quality of life, quality of care, and services to residents in the facility.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure an ongoing QAPI program was implemented, maintained and addressed concerns related to pressure ulcers and wounds in the facility. As a result of this failure, two Residents ( #97, #103) developed pressure injuries that worsened, became infected, required hospitalization, required intravenous antibiotics with surgical intervention and for one of the three Residents, resulted in death.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled QAPI - Program Design and Scope, dated and revised 10/21/22, last reviewed 10/24/24, indicated the following:Policy:- The facility will have a QAPI program that is ongoing, comprehensive, and capable of addressing the full range of care and services…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interview the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically,1. Review of the infection control program line listings, the facility failed to indicate the monitoring, tracking, and analyzing of infections in the facility. 2. The facility failed to ensure the use of Enhanced Barrier Precautions during a wound dressing treatment.Findings Include:Review of the facility policy titled Antibiotic Stewardship dated as reviewed 5/19/23, Indicated the following: -The program will be managed and overseen by the Infection Preventionist. 3. Action b. Assessment of residents suspected of having an infection. The facility will utilize the McGeer Criteria when considering initiation of antibiotics. 1. Review of the infection control program failed to indicate the monitoring, tracking, and analyzing of infections in the facility. The facility did not have any documentation 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement person-centered care plans for two Residents (#42, and #83) out of a sample of 30 Residents. Specifically,1. For Resident #42, the facility failed to implement an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care plan. 2. For Resident #83 the facility failed to develop a person-centered behavior and history of substance abuse care plan.Findings include:A review of the facility policy titled Area of Focus: Care Planning-Baseline, Comprehensive, and Routine Updates reviewed 1/4/24 indicated the following:-The facility is required to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs. -The comprehensive care plan must include a problem/focus statement, measurable goals, and interventions.A review of the facility policy titled 'Behavioral Health Services' reviewed 9/6/24 indicated 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-04 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
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, record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide care and maintenance of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC), consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#70), out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, for Resident #70, the facility failed to ensure nursing completed a PICC line dressing change as ordered by the physician.Findings Include:Review of facility policy titled 'Central Vascular Access Device (CVAD) Dressing Change' revised January 2004, indicated the following but not limited to:-The catheter insertion site is a potential entry site for bacteria that may cause a catheter-related infection.-perform sterile dressing changes: at least weekly-Upper arm circumference with PICC, and external catheter length measurements must still be completed as part of the initial assessment.Resident #70 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses that include acute osteomyelitis right ankle and foot and…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-04 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such 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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure services consistent with professional standards were provided for one Resident (#62) who required dialysis (a procedure to remove waste products and excess fluid from the body when the kidneys stop working properly), out of total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to follow physician's orders to ensure that blood pressure readings were not taken on the arm where the dialysis shunt (an access point from the dialysis machine to a blood artery) is located. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Hemodialysis Offsite Policy, revised and dated 4/17/23 indicated the following: - The facility should provide immediate monitoring and documentation of the status of the resident's access site(s) upon return form the dialysis treatment to observe for bleeding or other complications such as redness or bleeding. - Avoid taking blood pressure on the arm with the shunt in place. Resident #62 was admitted 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored as required for one Resident (#38), out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that medication was not left at the bedside for Resident #38 while unsupervised by staff. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Administration of Medications, dated and revised 2/13/24, indicated the following:- The facility will ensure medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician's order to address residents' diagnoses and sign and symptoms.Resident #38 was admitted to the facility in July 2018 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dysphagia and osteoarthritis. Review of Resident #38's most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) indicated that the Resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 out of 15 indicating intact cognition. The surveyor made the following observations:- On 11/19/24 at 9:22 A.M., Resident #38 was laying in his/her bed with his/her bedside table within…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-04 · tag F0840 — isolatedEmploy or obtain outside professional resources to provide services in the nursing home when the facility does not employ a qualified professional to furnish a required service.
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 interviews, the facility failed to ensure that recommended specialist appointments were scheduled for two Residents (#60, and #103), out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #60, the facility failed to ensure an outpatient appointment at the wound clinic was scheduled when requested by a Nurse Practitioner after the wound was documented as worsening and with signs of infection.2. For Resident #103, the facility failed to ensure an outpatient appointment at the wound clinic was scheduled when requested by a Nurse Practitioner after the wound was documented as worsening and with signs of infection.Findings Include:Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that recommended specialist appointments were scheduled for two Residents (#60, and #103), out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #60, the facility failed to ensure an outpatient appointment at the wound clinic was scheduled when requested by a Nurse…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-04 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately document in the medical record for three Residents (#63, #38, #62) out of a total sample of 30 Residents. Specifically:1. For Resident #63, the facility documented that the Resident was wearing heel boots (boots primarily used to prevent pressure ulcers, particularly on the heels) as ordered when he/she was not.2. For Resident #38, the facility documented that the Resident received medication when the Resident did not.3. For Resident #62, the facility documented the incorrect arm for which the Resident had a shunt placed for dialysis treatment.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled 'Nursing Documentation' dated as reviewed on 9/5/24 indicated the following:-The medical record must contain an accurate representation of the actual experience of the resident and include enough information to provide a picture of the resident's progress.-The process of preparing a complete record of a resident's care documentation is…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-11-22 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly labeled after opening on 3 of 3 medication carts observed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, dated 8/7/23, indicated Once any medication or biological package is opened, Facility should follow manufacturer/supplier guidelines with respect to expiration dates or opened medications. Facility staff should record the date opened on the primary medication container when the medication has a shortened expiration date once opened or opened. 1. On 11/20/23 at 8:04 A.M., the surveyor observed the high-side C unit medication cart, and the following was observed: - one Incruse Ellipta inhaler, opened and undated. - one Trelegy Ellipta inhaler, opened and undated. - two Symbicort inhalers, opened and undated. During an interview on 11/20/23 at 8:05 A.M., Nurse #1 said that inhalers should be dated when opened and said they are not. On 11/20/23 at 9:10 A.M., the surveyor observed the low-side C unit medication cart, and…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-22 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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, record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience for one Resident (#49), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Dignity, dated 9/23, indicated the following: Policy: *Each resident has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. Interactions and activities with residents by staff, temporary agency staff, or volunteers must focus on maintaining and enhancing the resident's self-esteem, self-worth, and incorporating the resident's goals, preferences, and choices. Staff must respect the resident's individuality as well as, honor and value their input. *A facility must treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. The facility must protect and promote the rights of the resident. Procedure: *2. Promoting…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-22 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure irregularities identified by the pharmacist were reviewed and acted upon by the physician/prescriber, for one Resident (#50) out of 5 residents reviewed, out of a total sample of 23 residents. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy Pharmacy Services and Procedures Manual, dated as revised 8/17/23 indicated the following: 1. The Consultant Pharmacist will conduct MRRs (Medication Regimen Review) if required under a Pharmacy Consultant Agreement and will make recommendations based on the information available in the resident's health record. 7. The pharmacist will address copies of residents' MRRs to the Director of Nursing and the attending physician and to the Medical Director. Facility staff should ensure that the attending physician, Medical Director, and the Director of Nursing are provided with copies of the MRRs. 8.1 For those issues that require Physician/Prescriber intervention, Facility should encourage Physician/Prescriber to either accept and act upon the recommendations contained in the MRR and…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-22 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 an accurate medical record for one Resident (#58), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the medical record indicated Resident #58 had a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder added after admission. Findings include: Resident #58 was admitted in June 2019 with diagnoses that included hypertension, history of falling, acute kidney failure and unspecified bipolar disorder. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 8/30/23, indicated Resident #58 scored 15 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status Exam, indicating he/she is cognitively intact and requires substantial/maximum assistance for daily care activities. Review of Resident #58's medical record indicated the diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder was added, dated 3/1/23. Further review of the medical record failed to indicate Resident #58 had a plan of care related to the diagnosis, nor was Resident #58 administered any medication for schizoaffective disorder. Further review of Resident #58's medical record indicated 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.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$161,920 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $161,920 — penalty dated 2024-12-04
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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.4 | -1.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 193; lowest-rated first.
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| PRESTON, FORREST | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/12/2004 |
| FAUSTIN, MOSELINE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/12/2025 |
| JANIAK, ANDREA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 08/24/2022 |
| LONG, ZOFIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/01/1999 |
| CROSS, CINDY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/06/2015 |
| HENRY, TERRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/06/2015 |
| THURMOND, JOAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/06/2015 |
| LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/12/2025 |
| FINKEL, NOAH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/05/2025 |
| FLETCHER, TODD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/01/2021 |
| LAY, LISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/24/2017 |
| PRESTON, AUBREY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/27/2024 |
| SWANKER, RICHARD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2022 |
| ZIEGLER, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 08/06/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 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.
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 $593K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225546. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-10, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.