Royal Braintree Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
95 Commercial Street, Braintree, MA 02184 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 204 certified beds · (781) 664-6818 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit 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) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — 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 held steady at 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 | 11.2% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.5% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.0% | 1.8% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.7% | 15.5% | 6.5% | better 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 | 2.1% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.0% | 15.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.8% | 19.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.9% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.7% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.4% | 21.2% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.1% | 21.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 1.4% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 78.5% | 77.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.1% | 25.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.5% | 11.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 1.88 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.80 | 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.
57.1% 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 133 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 20.6% 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 73 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 16% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 | 57.1%CMS range 46.2–66.3 | 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 | 12.8%CMS range 9.9–16.3 | 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 | 20.6% | 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 | 20.6% | 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 | 30.1% | 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 | 98.8% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 3.5% | 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 | 6.9%CMS range 4.2–11.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.82 | 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 204 beds and averages 182.3 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 22 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.14 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.73 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
33 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · F2026-02-11 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to maintain a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program with documentation of the development, implementation, and evaluation of corrective actions or performance improvement activities. Specifically, the facility failed to develop and implement appropriate plans of action for resident concerns regarding food temperatures.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Program, last reviewed in January 2025, indicated but was not limited to the following:-Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) principles will drive the decision making within our organization. Focus areas will include all systems that affect resident and family satisfaction, quality of care and services provided and all areas that affect the quality of life for persons living and working in our organization.-The QAPI committee will review data from areas of the organization believes it needs to monitor on a monthly basis to assure systems are being monitored 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 · F2026-02-11 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to maintain a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Committee which included the required members at their meetings. Specifically, the facility's Infection Preventionist failed to attend three of three QAPI meetings reviewed.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Quality Assurance on (sic) Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program, dated as revised January 2025, indicated but was not limited to:-The facility Administrator is responsible and accountable for developing, leading and closely monitoring our QAPI program.-QAPI activities will be governed and monitored by the Quality Assurance and Assessment (QAA) committee which will include: -The Medical Director, or designee -The Director of Nursing Services -The Administrator, or corporate leadership in his/her absence -Infection Preventionist -Two additional staff membersReview of the facility's QAPI Attendee sign-in sheets for September 2025 indicated the Infection Preventionist was not in attendance.Review of the facility's QAPI Attendee sign-in…
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 · E2026-02-11 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of Resident Council Minutes, a resident group meeting, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure grievances/complaints brought forward from the Resident Council were addressed and resolved in a timely manner to ensure the residents felt their concerns were acted upon and included the facility response to the group.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Resident Council Meetings, last reviewed December 2024, indicated but was not limited to the following:- The facility shall act upon concerns and recommendations of the Council, make attempts to accommodate recommendations to the extent practicable, and communicate its decisions to the CouncilReview of the facility's policy titled Complaint/Grievance Policy and Procedure, dated September 2023, indicated but was not limited to the following:-Voiced grievances (e.g. those about treatment, care management of funds, lost clothing, or violation of rights) are not limited to a formal, written process and may include a resident's verbalized complaint to facility staff.Review of Resident Council notes,…
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 · E2026-02-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that individualized, comprehensive care plans were developed and consistently implemented for one Resident (#5), out of a total sample of 34 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure resident specific, individualized care plans were developed to address the medical, physical, mental and psychosocial needs of a residents identified with a history of suicidal ideation/attempt/gestures. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans, last revised May 2025, indicated but was not limited to:-It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and all services that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment and meet professional standards of quality.-The comprehensive…
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 · E2026-02-11 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received food at appetizing temperatures for two of two test trays completed.Findings include:During initial screening on 2/5/26, the residents on the Windsor 2 unit expressed the following food concerns:- Food is awful, always comes up cold.- Food always comes up cold, never warm.- Food sucks, it's always cold.- Food always cold. Review of Resident Council Minutes from October 2025 through December 2025 indicated the following food concerns:-10/20/25: Cold eggs at breakfast, melted ice cream for dessert.-11/10/25: Minor concerns were raised regarding food temperatures. Food Council Meeting scheduled to address concerns.-12/17/25: Ice cream arriving melted when on meal carts.Food Council notes from 10/15/25 and 11/20/25 failed to include information on food temperature concerns.During observation of breakfast meal passes on the Kensington 2 Unit, surveyors made the following observations:-On 2/6/26 at 8:00 A.M., the food truck containing meal trays for all residents on the unit, arrived at the unit. At 8:45…
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 before2026-02-11 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for food safety to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illness to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food items were properly dated and stored in 3 of 7 kitchenette refrigerators.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Foods Brought by Family/Visitors, dated 1/2025, indicated but was not limited to the following:-Perishable foods must be stored in resealable contains with tightly fitting lids in the refrigerator. Containers will be labeled with the resident's name, the item and the use by date.-The nursing staff is responsible for discarding perishable foods on or before the use by date.-The nursing and/or food service staff must discard any foods prepared for the resident that show obvious signs of potential foodborne danger (for example mold growth, foul odor, past due packaging expiration dates).Review of the 2022 Food Code by the Food and Drug…
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 · D2026-02-11 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of individual and group activities designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of residents on one (Kensington 2 unit) of seven nursing units. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff provided a meaningful and engaging activity program, including materials for self-directed activity, for residents residing on the Kensington 2 unit (secured).Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Activities, last revised December 2025, indicated but was not limited to:-Facility-sponsored group, individual, and independent activities will be designed to meet the interests of each resident, as well as support their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.-Activities will be designed with the intent to:a. Enhance the resident's sense of well-being, belonging and usefulness.b. Create opportunities for each resident to have a meaningful life.c. Promote or enhance physical activity.d. Promote or enhance cognition.e. Promote or enhance…
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 · D2026-02-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a safe environment, free of accident hazards for one Resident (#74), out of 35 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #74's smoking materials were stored securely, and a smoking assessment was completed. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy tilted Smoking Policy and Procedure, undated, indicated but was not limited to:- It is the policy of [Corporate Name] to provide a safe environment for residents, staff and visitors through the enforcement of a smoking policy designed to reduce risks to residents who smoke tobacco products, reduce the risks of passive smoking for others and reduce the risk of fire.- Independent Smoker: a resident who has been assessed by the IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) to be able to smoke safely in the designated area without staff supervision. The Independent Smoker will adhere to all guidelines for safe smoking outlined in this policy and, if there are any infractions, will be re-assessed for safe smoking. The resident must keep all lighting…
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 before2026-02-11 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in accordance with acceptable standards for one Resident (#94), out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #94's three inhaler medications were stored securely. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Self-Administration of Medications, undated, indicated but was not limited to the following:- Residents have the right to self-administer medications if the interdisciplinary team has determined that it is clinically appropriate and safe for the resident to do so.- Self-administered medications must be stored in a safe and secure place, which is not accessible by other residents. Review of the facility's policy titled Bedside Medication Storage, undated, indicated but was not limited to the following:- Bedside medication storage is permitted for residents who are able to self-administer medications, upon the written order of the prescriber and once self-administration skills have been assessed and deemed appropriate…
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 · D2025-12-02 · 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 records reviewed and interviews for two of three sampled residents (Resident #2 and #3), the Facility failed to ensure that upon admission, they developed and implemented baseline care plans with interventions, treatments, goals, and outcomes that addressed the residents' overall immediate care needs.Findings include:Review of the Facility Policy titled Baseline Care Plans, dated as last revised 05/2025, indicated that a baseline plan of care for each resident is to include the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the residents that meet professional standards of quality care. The Policy further indicated that the baseline care plan be developed within 48 hours of admission and supervising staff should verify within 48 hours that a baseline care plan has been developed.1) Resident #2 was admitted to the Facility in 9/2025, diagnoses include a history of a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) with seizure disorder, multiple falls, acute urinary retention with an indwelling…
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 23 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-02 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #2), whose Hospital Discharge Summary included instructions related to voiding trials and the removal of his/her indwelling catheter (flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine), the Facility failed to ensure he/she underwent a voiding trial and was assessed timely for potential removal of the catheter, which resulted in the extended use of an indwelling device.Findings include:Resident #2 was admitted to the Facility in 9/2025, diagnoses include a history of a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) with seizure disorder, multiple falls, acute urinary retention with an indwelling catheter in place, and cirrhosis (severe scarring of the liver from long term damage) secondary to alcohol use.Review of Resident #2's Hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated that an indwelling catheter had been placed secondary to acute urinary retention. The Discharge Summary indicated to attempt a voiding trial once discharged from 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 · E2024-11-15 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and records reviewed, the facility failed to ensure a reasonable accommodation was made for seven Residents (#150, #101, #49, #148, #65, #102, and #93), on the Sunshine Unit with a census of 35. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the call system was accessible to the Residents to call for staff assistance. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Resident Call System, undated, indicated but was not limited to: -When in their rooms and toilet and bathing areas, residents will have a means of directly contacting caregivers. 1. On the following dates and times, the surveyor observed Resident #150 without a means of directly contacting caregivers. The surveyor observed Resident #150 in bed with the call light clipped to itself and hanging against the wall, not within the Resident's reach, with no hand-held device (i.e., hand bell) observed: -11/12/24 at 10:53 A.M., -11/12/24 at 3:35 P.M., -11/13/24 at 9:11 A.M., -11/13/24 at 11:36 A.M., -11/13/24 at 2:08 P.M., -11/13/24 at 4:40 P.M., -11/14/24 at 8:05 A.M., and -11/14/24 at…
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 · E2024-11-15 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment was clean, comfortable, and homelike. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the resident rooms were maintained in good repair (without holes, painted) and homelike on one unit (K2) out of seven. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Royal Health Group Preventative Maintenance Program, undated, indicated but was not limited to: -A preventative maintenance program shall be developed and implemented to ensure the provision of a safe, functioning, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public. -The Maintenance Director is responsible for developing and maintaining a schedule of maintenance service to ensure that the buildings, grounds, and equipment are maintained in a safe and operable manner. On 11/13/24 at 8:30 A.M. on the K2 unit, the surveyor observed: -room [ROOM NUMBER]-B: Missing a privacy curtain; and a hole in the wall with paint cracking -room [ROOM NUMBER]-B:…
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 before2024-11-15 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for food safety and sanitation to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illness to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure thickened beverage items were properly dated and stored in three of seven kitchenettes. Findings include: 1. Review of the 2022 Food Code by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), revised 1/2023, indicated but was not limited to the following: 3-501.17 Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Date Marking. (B) Except as specified in (E) - (G) of this section, refrigerated, READY-TO-EAT TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD prepared and PACKAGED by a FOOD PROCESSING PLANT shall be clearly marked, at the time the original container is opened in a FOOD ESTABLISHMENT and if the FOOD is held for more than 24 hours, to indicate the date or day by which the FOOD shall be consumed on the FDA Food Code 2022 Chapter 3. Food Chapter 3 - 29…
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 · D2024-11-15 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#67) was provided a therapeutic diet as ordered, in a total sample of 34 residents. Specifically, Resident #67, with weight loss, was not provided fortified food as ordered. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Fortified Food Program, undated, indicated the following: -the goal of the fortified food program is to provide a higher calorie and higher protein food item to residents -a fortified food is typically a food from the regular diet with additional ingredients which provide extra calories and/or protein without increasing the volume of food offered to the resident Resident #67 was admitted to the facility in April 2024 with diagnoses of dementia and failure to thrive. Review of the care plan indicated Resident #67 had a nutritional problem related to decreased appetite with a goal of maintaining adequate nutritional status. The care plan interventions included having fortified foods with all meals. Review of the Physician's Orders indicated that an order was…
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 before2024-11-15 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess triggers for a Resident (#22) with a history of trauma, to avoid potential re-traumatization, out of a total sample of 34 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Trauma Informed Care, dated as revised in November 2023, indicated the following: -the commitment to recognize events in resident's past that may have been traumatic and may continue to have a negative, upsetting or emotionally difficult impact on their lives -as part of the admission process a specific assessment will be done consisting of several questions that are worded to assesses past experiences and not trigger the episode -once the initial assessment has been completed by Social Services a choice can be made to proceed or not to proceed to a psych referral based on responses -if a resident has a history of trauma that is documented or if they have triggered from the assessment the Social Worker (SW) and Interdisciplinary team (IDT) need to immediately formulate a plan of care to assist the resident in coping within 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 · D2023-11-20 · 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 #1), who experienced a decline in condition with weakness, and who had a new physicians order in effect on 4/24/23 at the start of the evening shift, for nursing obtain a urine sample STAT (obtain sample immediately) for testing, the Facility failed to ensure nursing notified the provider when 24 hours later, they had been unable to obtain the sample. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy titled, Change in a Resident's Condition or Status, undated, indicated that the Nurse will promptly notify the resident's physician when there has been a significant change in the resident's medical, physical, emotional, mental condition or status. The Policy indicated that the Nurse will notify the physician when there has been a need to alter the resident's medical treatment significantly and except in medical emergencies, notifications will be made within 24 hours of a change in the resident's medical, mental change in condition or status. Review of the Facility's Policy titled, Charting 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 · D2023-11-20 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
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 records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had a physicians order for STAT (to be obtained immediately) bloodwork, the Facility failed to ensure abnormal laboratory results were promptly reported to his/her Health Care Providers (Physician or Nurse Practitioner (NP). On 04/24/23 Resident #1's laboratory results were reported to the Facility by the laboratory via their electronic medical record system, Point Click Care (PCC), however the results were not reported to his/her Health Care Provider until the following day. Findings Include: Review of the Facility's Policy, titled Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol, dated as revised October 2022, indicated the following: -the physician will order lab testing, the staff will arrange for the tests and the laboratory will report test results to the facility; -the nurse will review all results and communicate the results to the physician; -the nurse will identify the urgency of communicating with 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 · D2023-11-20 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each 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 #1), who had lost his/her upper dentures in October 2022, the Facility failed to ensure he/she had a timely dental consultation for the replacement of his/her upper dentures. Resident #1 was not seen by the dentist until July 2023 for the fabrication of the upper dentures, nine months after the loss of his/her upper dentures. Findings Include: Review of the Facility's Policy, titled Dental Services, dated May 2023, indicated the following: -routine and emergency dental services are available to meet the resident's oral health services; -facility will contract with a Consultant Dentist to provide services on site; -dentures will be protected from loss or damage, to the extent practicable, while being stored; -if dentures are lost, residents will be referred for dental services within three days; -if the referral is not made within three days, documentation will be provided regarding what is being done to ensure that the resident is able to eat and drink adequately while awaiting the dental 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 · E2023-08-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to report alleged incidents for three Residents (#147, #26, and #21), out of a sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #147, to report a resident-to-resident altercation; 2. For Resident #26, to report an incident of alleged abuse to the state agency in a timely manner; and 3. For Resident #21, to report a resident-to-resident altercation. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Abuse Policy' with no revision date indicated the following: *An employee who suspects an alleged violation shall immediately notify the executive director or his/her designee. The executive director shall also notify the appropriate state agency in accordance with the state law. The results of all investigations must be reported immediately to the executive director or his/her designee and to the appropriate state agency, as required by state law with initial report submitted within 2 hours and follow up within five working days of the violation. 1. Resident #147 was…
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 · E2023-08-03 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that it was free of a medication error rate of 5 percent or greater. The surveyor observed 1 of 2 licensed nurses (Nurse #2) make errors while administering medications on 1 of 2 units. Five medication errors were observed out of 30 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 16.67%. This affected two Residents (#48, #96), out of a total of three residents observed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Administering Medications, dated December 2012, indicated the following: -medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. -medications must be administered within one (1) hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified (for example: before and after meal orders) -the individual administering the medications must check the label three (3) times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right dosage, right time and right method (route) of administration before giving 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 · E2023-08-03 · 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
Based on interview, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for two Residents (#116, #38), out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #116, to ensure Eliquis (apixaban) (an anticoagulant medication used to treat and prevent blood clots) was given as ordered following a hospitalization for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (a blood clot in a deep vein) and pulmonary embolism (a blood clot in the lung) requiring a thrombectomy (a procedure to remove blood clots); and 2. For Resident #38, to ensure Chlorpromazine (an antipsychotic medication used to treat schizoaffective disorder), was given timely per facility policy on 23 out of 42 opportunities, resulting in a significant medication error. Findings include: 1. Resident #116 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 with a diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/3/23, indicated Resident #116 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam score of 15…
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 before2023-08-03 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were dated once opened, according to manufacturer's guidelines in 3 out of 4 medication carts observed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Medications, undated, indicated the facility shall store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. -the facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologics. 1. On 8/3/23 at 6:36 A.M., the surveyor and Nurse #4 observed the [NAME] Unit north side medication cart: -one bottle of Prosource (liquid protein), opened, and undated. During an interview on 8/3/23 at 6:36 A.M., Nurse #4 said the Prosource should be dated when opened. 2. On 8/3/23 at 6:45 A.M., the surveyor and Nurse #5 observed the Kensington 2 Unit medication cart: -one bottle of Dorzolamide 2% Ophthalmic (eye drops) Solution, opened and undated During an interview on 8/3/23 at 6:48 A.M., Nurse #5 said that eye drops should be dated when…
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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident's (#38) grievances were addressed, out of 35 sampled residents. Findings include: The facility's policy titled Complaint/Grievance Policy and Procedure, undated, indicated the following: -All residents and their responsible representatives will have a mechanism to voice grievances and complaints to the Grievance Official in order to facilitate communication and timely resolution of the matter. 1. Grievance/Complaint forms will be available at the nurse's station or other designated area. 2. Resident and/or their responsible representative shall complete the form. 3. If a resident is unable to complete the form, a staff member shall assist them. 4. Resident and/or responsible representative have the right to file a grievance anonymously. 5. Completed forms should be forwarded to the Grievance Official. 6. The Grievance Official, or designee in his/her absence, will review the grievance within 24 business hours of receipt. 7. The Grievance Official will oversee the process, track…
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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to apply a splint as ordered by the physician for one Resident (#5), out of a sample of 35 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Range of Motion' with no revision date indicated the following: *Residents will not experience an avoidable reduction in range of motion (ROM). *Residents with limited range of motion will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent a further decrease in range of motion (ROM). Resident #5 was admitted to the facility in March 2021 with diagnoses including a right-hand contracture. Review of the Resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/17/23, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15 indicating intact cognition. On 8/1/23 at 9:44 A.M., 8/2/23 at 7:48 A.M., and 8/3/23 at 8:34 A.M., the surveyor observed the Resident without a right-hand splint on. The hand splint was not observed anywhere in the vicinity of the Resident. Review of the August Physician's Orders 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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to obtain physician's orders for treatment of a skin tear (layers of skin separate or peel back) for one Resident (#154), out of a total sample of 35 residents. Findings include: Resident #154 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease and depression. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/11/23, indicated Resident #154 was severely cognitively impaired based on staff assessment. The MDS further indicated the Resident has behaviors and rejects care at times. Resident #154 requires extensive assistance for personal care. On 8/1/23 at 9:23 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #154 in the unit dining area with an approximately 2-3 centimeters linear skin tear, bright red in color above his/her right forearm. On 8/1/23 at 12:30 P.M., the surveyor observed Resident #154 with a large foam bandage above his/her right forearm. On 8/2/23 at 8:33 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #154 with a large foam bandage above his/her right forearm. Review…
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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
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 one Resident (#116), out of a total sample of 35 residents, received proper treatment to maintain vision following cataract surgery. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure follow-up appointments were scheduled with the surgeon following the procedure. Findings include: A cataract is defined as a clouding of the normally clear lens of the eye which can impair vision. Cataract surgery may be needed if impaired vision interferes with usual day-to-day activities. Resident #116 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 with diagnoses of Diabetes Mellitus and cataracts. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/3/23, indicated Resident #116 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam score of 15 out of 15, indicating he/she was cognitively intact. The MDS further indicated the Resident was non-ambulatory and had impaired vision. Review of the medical record indicated Resident #116 was out of the facility on 6/8/23 for cataract surgery with a follow-up appointment scheduled for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide respiratory care per the physician's orders for two Residents (#148 and #5), out of a sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed for Residents #148 and #5 to clean the oxygen filters as ordered. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Oxygen administration via nasal Cannula' with no revision date indicated the following: *Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident. 1. Resident #148 was admitted to the facility in July 20023 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/27/23, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99 indicating the Resident is rarely interviewable and understood. On 8/1/23 at 9:48 A.M. and 8/3/23 at 8:33 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #148 sleeping with continuous Oxygen being administered via nasal cannula. The oxygen filter was clogged with dust and lint. Review of the August Physician's Orders 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 · Dcited before2023-08-03 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement trauma informed care plans, specific to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), for two Residents (#40 and #95), out of a sample of 35 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Trauma Informed Care', with no revision date, indicated the following: *Trauma informed care is culturally sensitive and person-centered. *As part of the comprehensive assessment, identify history of trauma or interpersonal violence when possible. 1. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility in July 2023 with diagnoses including PTSD. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/26/23, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15 indicating intact cognition. On 8/3/23 at 11:59 A.M., the surveyor reviewed Resident #40's diagnoses sheet which indicated a PTSD diagnosis. Further review of Resident #40's care plan did not indicate a PTSD care plan. During an interview on 8/3/23 at 9:52 A.M., Social Worker (SW) #2 said a personalized, trauma…
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 · D2023-08-03 · 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 observation, record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for one Resident (#148), out of a sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to transcribe a physician's telephone order for the Resident to receive Oxygen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Oxygen administration via nasal Cannula' with no revision date indicated the following: *Verify there is a physician's order for this procedure, review the physician's orders for facility protocol for oxygen administration. Resident #148 was admitted to the facility in July 2023 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/27/23, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99 indicating the Resident is rarely interviewable and understood. On 8/1/23 at 9:48 A.M. and 8/3/23 at 8:33 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #148 sleeping with Oxygen being administered via nasal cannula. Review of the Resident's Physician's Orders did not indicate an order to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of infections for one Resident (#116), out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: a. Ensure contact precautions were maintained for Resident #116 while being treated for an active multi-drug resistant organism per facility policy, and b. Ensure enhanced barrier precautions were maintained for Resident #116 following the identification of a multi-drug resistant organism per facility policy. Findings include: Resident #116 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 with a diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/3/23, indicated Resident #116 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam score of 15 out of 15, indicating he/she was cognitively intact. The MDS further indicated the Resident was non-ambulatory 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.
- No harm found · B2024-11-15 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that for two Residents (#86 and #232), of a total sample of 34 residents, that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected the residents' status. Findings include: 1. Resident #232 was admitted to the facility in September 2024 with diagnoses which included a fall requiring rehabilitation. Review of the MDS assessment, dated 9/26/24, indicated, under the Physical Restraint section, P0100, that bed rails were not used. Review of the Physician's Orders, dated 9/16/24, indicated that bed rails were to be used daily. From 11/12/24 to 11/14/24, the surveyor observed each day of the survey that Resident #232's bed rails were in place and up, on the left and right upper part of the Resident's bed. During an interview on 11/13/24 at 10:52 A.M., Nurse #4 said that the Resident used bed rails daily. Nurse #4 reviewed the assessment dated [DATE] and said it was inaccurate because bed rails were used daily and the assessment should…
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.
- No harm found · B2023-08-03 · tag F0582 — patternGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to inform 2 out of 3 Residents, or their representative, of potential liability for payment for non-covered services including estimated cost of services. Findings include: The Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) is a form which provides information to Residents and/or their beneficiaries so that they can decide if they wish to continue receiving the skilled services they are receiving at the facility that may not be paid for by Medicare and assume financial responsibility. Record review of three Residents who had been taken off their Medicare Part A benefit indicated the facility failed to provide information to 2 of the 3 Residents regarding potential liability on the SNFABN form. During an interview on 8/2/23 at 12:23 P.M., the facility's Social Worker said that residents should be given notice of potential liability and is not sure why that did not happen in this case.
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ROYAL HEALTH GROUP — 12 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 | 3.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAMARY, JAMES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 08/01/2008 |
| REID, PAULA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2013 |
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 86% 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 $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
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 225058. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-11, 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.