No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Recuperative Services Unit-Hebrew Rehab Center

1200 Centre Street, Boston, MA 02131 · Non profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (617) 325-8000 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (617) 325-8000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0740)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1153 Centre St · (617) 983-7003 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1 Corinth St · (617) 323-6544 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3936 Washington St · (617) 524-7708 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1300 Centre St · (617) 524-1718 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3 VFW Pkwy · (617) 323-9922

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 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 held steady at 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.2%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine53.7%77.7%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.9%25.7%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.1%11.9%12.0%better

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.

67.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 753 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

67.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
61.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.83U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.64hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
1.05hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 61.5% 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 335 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 1.83 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 100% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF67.3%CMS range 63.5–71.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.6%CMS range 6.8–10.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge61.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge57.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge60.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified98.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting99.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge99.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.2%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.8%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization4.4%CMS range 3.2–7.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.691.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

1.19
RN hours/ resident / day
1.04
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.79
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.02
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.99
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 30.1 residents a day — about 60% occupied, or roughly 20 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 5.02 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.19 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.79 is at or above 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 4.63 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.17 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.27 to 0.99 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-24)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-17)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · 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

    Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was severely cognitively impaired, unable to give consent and had an activated Health Care Proxy (HCP), the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was treated in a dignified and respectful manner, when on 12/22/25 during the day shift, Resident #1's hair had been cut (which was against his/her cultural beliefs) by a staff member, and was cut without consent from his/her Health Care Agent (HCA).Findings include:Review of the Facility's Policy titled Patient [NAME] of Rights and Responsibilities, dated as approved 07/22/25, indicated the following:-ensure all patients are treated fairly with consideration of individual needs and respecting their rights.-staff is committed to provide high quality care while respecting the rights, individuality, dignity, and culture of each patient.-if there is a suspected instance where we failed to meet these goals, or if a patient or family member feels that rights have been violated, they are encouraged to discuss their concerns with the people involved…

    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 · F2025-07-24 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit direct care staffing data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the entire reporting period, Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter 2 2025 (January 1 - March 31), in accordance with the schedule specified by CMS.Findings include:Review of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Report, CASPER Report 1705D, FY Quarter 2 2025 (January 1 - March 31), indicated the facility failed to submit data for the quarter.Review of the facility's submission report titled 'CMS Payroll Based Journal - Upload Data File', dated 5/7/25, indicated a submission had been made for PBJ data. This submission report indicated:-Your submission has been received and will be checked for errors within 24 hours.-Note: This screen does not confirm that your submission is error free.-This is a reminder to: Check CASPER for a system generated PBJ File Validation Report within 24 hours.During an interview on 7/23/25 at 7:13 A.M., the Quality and Regulatory Compliance Nurse said she was responsible for submitting the PBJ…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff did not use contaminated gloves to directly handle ready-to-eat food. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Personal Hygiene and Uniforms, revised January 2024, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: -Culinary and Nutrition Staff will adhere to the highest standard of personal hygiene. -Proper hand washing is the single most effective way to minimize the transfer of food-borne illness. All staff must wash their hands frequently and particularly in the following situations: After coming in contact with any soiled utensil, equipment or surface and before touching anything unsoiled. On 7/17/24 from 7:49 A.M. to 8:03 A.M., the surveyor made the following observations during a continuous tray line observation during breakfast service: -The cook contaminated his gloves by picking up a toaster and moving it, he then further contaminated his gloves by touching a…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement the plan of care for one Resident (#434) out of a total sample of 12 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide supervision with eating for Resident #434. Findings include: Resident #434 was admitted to the facility in July 2024 with diagnoses including failure to thrive and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/16/14, indicated Resident #434 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15. Review of Resident #434's plan of care related to dysphagia, dated 7/16/24, indicated: - Supervision recommendations: 100% of the time, need for cueing, Encourage self-feeding. - Supervision: Feeds self with close, line of sight/direct supervision to load to utensil with food, encouragement to continue eating. Review of the speech therapy evaluation, dated 7/12/24 and signed by the physician on 7/14/24, indicated: - Pt (patient) presents with presbyphagia (age-related…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview and observation for one Resident (#81) of 12 sampled residents, the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice. Specifically, the facility failed to develop a resident care policy for oxygen administration and failed to obtain a physician's order for oxygen use, which staff were actively administering to the Resident. Findings include: Review of the Healthcare Quality Association on Accreditation, dated 5/4/2017, indicated physician orders must be obtained for oxygen use and should include the amount of oxygen (flow rate) and duration. Review of policies indicated the facility had not developed a policy for oxygen use. Resident #81 was admitted to the facility in June 2024, and had diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD, a lung disease limiting the ability to breath), dyspnea (labored breathing) and multiple fractured ribs. Review of Resident #81's Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/9/24, indicated there was no reference to use of oxygen therapy. Review of Resident…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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, policy review, record review and interview for one Resident (#18) of 12 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biologicals in accordance with State and Federal requirements. Specifically, for Resident #18 the facility failed to ensure nursing stored his/her physician's ordered nasal spray and timolol (medicated eye drops used to treat high pressure in the eyes) according to State and Federal requirements. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, Medication Storage, Security and Access, dated as revised 10/25/21, indicated all medications will be stored and secured in accordance with all state and federal regulations. Medications stored in patient care areas: 1. Medication storage areas are accessible only to authorized personnel, as designated by the Director of Pharmacy. 2. All medications are stored in a secured location or in an area where the medication storage area is under continuous surveillance by licensed personnel. The Director of Pharmacy has authority to designate storage areas for all medications. 3.…

    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 · Dcited before2023-05-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement a personalized mood care plan for 1 Resident (#1A) out of a sample of 13 Residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Nursing Documentation Policy' with a revision date of 12/13/21 indicated the following: *A care plan will be initiated for active problems and updated regularly, and when change in condition is noted. *Care plans will be initiated during change in condition and include individualized care plans with person specific approaches. Review of the facility policy titled 'Medical Management' with no revision date, indicated the following: *Upon admission to the Recuperative Services Unit, each patient is assessed by our team of professionals including case managers/social workers and psychiatrists. *At the conclusion of the assessment process, the team initiates a plan of care to be followed during the patient's stay, depending on the care needs of the patient, the following clinical specialties are…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-24 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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 make a psychiatric service referral for 1 Resident (#1A) out of a sample of 13 Residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Medical Management' with no revision date indicated the following: *Upon admission to the Recuperative Services Unit, each patient is assessed by our team of professionals including case managers/social workers and psychiatrists. *At the conclusion of the assessment process, the team initiates a plan of care to be followed during the patient's stay, depending on the care needs of the patient, the following clinical specialties are also available upon request-psychiatric services Resident #1A was admitted to the facility in April 2023 with diagnoses including dysphagia and feeding by Gastrostomy tube (G-tube). A review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of a possible 15 indicating intact cognition. During an observation 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 observations, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored securely in the resident care unit affecting 4 Residents (#65, #170, #268 and #273). Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled 'Medication Storage,Security, and Access' Revised 5/1/2023, Indicated the following: Policy: All medications will be stored and secured in accordance with all State and Federal regulations. Definition: *Secure Area: A secure area is an area in which drugs and biologicals are stored in a manner to prevent unmonitored access by authorized individuals. Procedure: Medications stored in patient care areas: *2. All medications are stored in a secured location or in an area where medication storage area is under continuous surveillance by licensed personnel. The Director of Pharmacy has authority to designate storage areas for all medications. Patient's own medication storage: Patient's own medication that cannot be sent home with a family member must be secured in a tamper evident bag and stored in the pharmacy department until discharge. During…

    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
  • No harm found · B2025-07-24 · tag F0636 — pattern
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff completed comprehensive MDS assessments within the required time frame for 11 Residents (#46, #17, #21, #40, #73, #51, #7, #66, #60, #23, and #10), out of a total sample of 20 residents.Findings include: The MDS is part of the U.S. federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents in Medicare or Medicaid-certified nursing homes. It is a core set of screening, clinical and functional status elements, including common definitions and coding categories, which forms the foundation of a comprehensive assessment. Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual, dated October 2024, indicated for admission (Comprehensive) Assessments, should be completed no later than the 14th calendar day of the resident's admission (admission date + 13 calendar days) 1. Resident #46 was admitted to the facility in June 2025. Review of Resident #46's admission MDS assessment, dated 6/30/25, indicated…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2024-07-17 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately coded for one Resident (#28) out of three sampled closed records. Specifically, for Resident #28, the facility failed to accurately code the correct discharge location on the MDS assessment. Findings include: Resident #28 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses that include diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and hyponatremia (levels of sodium in the blood is low). Review of MDS assessment, dated 6/5/24, indicated Resident #28 was discharged to a short-term general hospital. Review of Resident #28's Case Management/Social Work Discharge Assessment, dated 6/4/24, indicated he/she would discharge home on 6/5/24 with services for Nursing, Physical Therapy, and Occupational Therapy. During a phone interview on 7/17/24 at 10:06 A.M., the MDS Nurse said that the discharge destination should have been coded as discharge to home and it was not. During an interview on 7/17/24 at 3:12 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the MDS assessment should be coded…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2023-05-24 · tag F0640 — widespread
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on records reviewed and interviews, the facility failed to ensure MDS (Minimum Data Set) data was transmitted to the CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid System) for 35 resident assessments. Findings include: During record reviews on 5/23/23 and 5/24/23, the surveyor observed several records with MDS assessments overdue for transmission. During an interview with the Senior Director of Utilization Management on 5/23/23 at 11:30 A.M., she said that we have been without an MDS Nurse since November, and we are currently using contract MDS nurses as well as the MDS nurse from a sister facility to help us catch up. During a phone interview with the MDS Nurse covering from the sister facility on 5/23/23 at 1:09 P.M., she said that she has been assisting with the MDS transmission backlog and hired a few contract nurses as well. She said that she is now running a report every 2 days to transmit MDS assessments more often to avoid further backlog. Review of the MDS report provided by the Senior Director of Utilization Management on 5/24/23 at 8:50 A.M., indicated there were 35 MDS…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
BANE, HARRISONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2023
COHEN, HOWARDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2020
DESIMONE, THOMASIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2013
EDMONDS, JANEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2021
FLEISHMAN, VALERIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2024
FLIER, STEVENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2015
FLORENCE SMITH, SUSANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2011
GENSER, MAURICEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2014
KOTLER, HAROLDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2011
ROSENTHAL, DAVIDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2011
WEBBER, JAYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2011
ZEIDEL, MARKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/01/2012
COHEN, MARSHAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/07/2013
HENKEN, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/22/2024
JOHNSON, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/20/2024
MANDEL, ERNESTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
WOOLF, LOUISIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/15/2009
MASTERSON, ANNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2021
RETALIC, TAMMYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/13/2004
CLIFTONLARSONALLEN LLPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2017
FORVIS MAZARS LLPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 29 rows in the source record cover these 21 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.

2 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.

What families pay in MA

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page for homes that do.

Typical monthly cost in Massachusetts
$14,448/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$15,817/mo
Nursing home (private)
$9,600/mo
Assisted living

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 225759. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, 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.

What to do next