Hellenic Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
601 Sherman Street, Canton, MA 02021 · Non profit - Corporation · 154 certified beds · (781) 828-7450 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- 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
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — 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 (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 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 | 25.9% | 16.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.3% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.4% | 1.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.6% | 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 | 1.3% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.9% | 15.4% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.8% | 19.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.0% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.9% | 21.2% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.0% | 21.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 84.3% | 77.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.4% | 25.7% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.3% | 11.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.25 | 1.88 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.11 | 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.
49.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 53 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 45.3% 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 53 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.
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 | 49.3%CMS range 36.3–64.3 | 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 | 11.8%CMS range 7.6–17.9 | 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 | 45.3% | 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 | 37.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 39.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 4.1–14.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.95 | 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
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff provided assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) for one Resident (#89), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, for Resident #89 the facility failed to provide assistance with the removal of facial hair. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Supporting, dated 3/18, indicated the following: Policy-Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs).-Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. Policy Interpretation and Implementation:-Appropriate care and services will be provided for residents who are unable to carry out ADLs independently, with the consent of the resident and in accordance with the plan of care, including appropriate support and assistance with: hygiene…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to follow up on a significant weight change in a timely manner and failed to implement a nutrition intervention as recommended by the Registered Dietitian (RD) for one Resident (#11), out of a total of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to assess a significant weight loss for over 11 weeks and implement interventions for a nutrition supplement as recommended by the RD for Resident #11.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled 'Weight Assessment and Interventions', dated March 2022, indicated but was not limited to:-Resident weights are monitored for undesirable or unintended weight loss or gain.-Any weight change of 5% or more since the last weight assessment is retaken the next day for confirmation. If the weight is verified, nursing will immediately notify the dietitian in writing.Resident #11 was admitted to the facility in July 2019 with diagnoses including dysphagia, oropharyngeal phase (difficulty swallowing), adult failure to thrive, and dementia.Review of Resident #11's Minimum Data Set…
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 · E2024-08-30 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented dialysis care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#10), out of 27 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide ongoing communication between the nursing facility and dialysis facility. Findings include: Review of the Long Term Care Facility Outpatient Dialysis Services Agreement, dated 6/15/07, indicated but was not limited to the following: 3. Resident Information. The Facility shall ensure that all appropriate medical and administrative information accompany all residents at the time of transfer or referral to the Center. This information, shall include, but is not limited to, where appropriate, the following: a. Resident's name, address, date of birth , and Social Security Number; b. Name, address and telephone number of the resident's next of kin; c. Resident's third party payor data; d. Appropriate medical records, including history of the resident's illness, including laboratory and x-ray findings; e. Treatment presently being…
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 before2024-08-30 · 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 store, prepare and serve food in accordance with 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: 1. Ensure food was properly labeled in two out of two refrigerators in the kitchen; and 2. Properly label, date, and store food products in two of two nourishment kitchenettes. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Food Storage: Cold Foods, revised 2/2023, indicated but was not limited to: - All foods will be stored wrapped or in covered containers, labeled and dated and arranged in a manner to prevent cross contamination. - All refrigerated, ready-to-eat Time/Temperature Control Safety (TCS) prepared foods that are to be held for more than 24 hours at a temperature of 41 degrees Fahrenheit or less, will be labeled and dated with a prepared date (Day 1) and use by date (Day 7). Review of the 2022…
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 before2024-08-30 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that residents and/or their representatives were fully informed in advance and given information necessary to make health care decisions including the dose and benefits of psychotropic medications prior to their use for one Resident (#32), from a total sample of 27 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Policy and Procedure for Informed Consent for Psychotropic Medications, dated 3/17/16, indicated but was not limited to: -It is the policy of the facility that informed consent for the administration of psychotropic medications will be obtained prior to the administration of any psychotropic medication, including antipsychotic medications and medications used out of class for alternate clinical purpose. -Documentation will include: -Dose range for the medication -Purpose of the medication -Risks of use of the medication; if on antipsychotics, the black box warning is reviewed for use of antipsychotics in dementia related psychosis -Benefits of use of the medication Resident #23 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 · D2024-08-30 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Physician/Practitioner was notified of a change in treatment for one Resident (#17), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the Physician/Practitioner was notified when the Wound Consultant recommended the initiation of an antibiotic. Findings include: Resident #17 was admitted to the facility in July 2024 with the following diagnoses: Stage 4 pressure ulcer on his/her right calf (a wound with full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon, or muscle). Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/30/24, indicated Resident #17 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15, and had one Stage 4 pressure ulcer that was present on admission. Review of the Wound Consultant's Wound Evaluation and Management Summary, dated 8/2/24, indicated but was not limited to: -Stage 4 pressure wound of the right, upper calf, full thickness: Additional Wound Detail: Augmentin (antibiotic) 875 milligrams (mg) twice…
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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, comfortable, and homelike environment for the residents at the facility, for 1 of 3 nursing units. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Homelike Environment, dated as revised February 2021, indicated but was not limited to: -Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment and encouraged to use their personal belongings to the extent possible -The facility staff and management maximizes, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized, homelike setting. These characteristics include a clean, sanitary, and orderly environment. On the following days of survey, the Surveyor observed the following in the C Unit Lounge: On 8/26/24 at: -9:27 A.M., eight resident wheeled positioning devices which included standard wheelchairs, high back wheelchairs and Broda chairs (a wheelchair that provides comfort, support, and mobility), a mattress, a rolling walker, and a set of leg rests. -11:02 A.M., six resident wheeled…
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 · D2024-08-30 · 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff developed a baseline or comprehensive care plan within 48 hours of the resident's admission, which included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care for two Residents (#96 and #251), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #96, to develop and implement a baseline care plan related to falls; and 2. For Resident #251, to ensure staff provided the resident and/or their representative with a summary of the baseline care plan within 48 hours of his/her admission. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care Plans - Baseline, last revised March 2022, indicated but was not limited to: - Policy Statement: A baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate health and safety needs is developed for each resident within forty-eight (48) hours of admission. - The baseline care plan includes instructions needed to provide effective, person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and records reviewed for two Residents (#35 and #52), out of 27 sampled residents, the facility failed to develop and/or implement comprehensive care plans to reflect the individual needs of the resident. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #35, to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address the Resident's diagnoses of dementia with behavioral disturbance and psychotic disorder with delusions; and 2. For Resident #52, to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address trauma informed care related to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised March 2022, indicated but was not limited to the following: -Policy Statement: A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. 2. The comprehensive, person-centered…
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 before2024-08-30 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two Residents (#35 and #63), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #35, a. to ensure that the Resident's fingerstick blood sugar was obtained per physician's order, b. to ensure that a physician's order was in place for the care and maintenance of the Resident's catheter drainage bag, and c. to ensure that a voiding trial (a procedure in which the ability of the bladder to empty after removal of a urinary catheter is measured) on 8/23/24 was implemented per physician's order; and 2. For Resident #63, to ensure physician's orders were complete for the management of a continuous glucose monitoring sensor and included orders to remove and change the device every 14 days. Findings include: Review of the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Nursing Advisory Ruling on Nursing Practice, dated as…
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 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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 provide the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for one Resident (#57), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to fully develop and implement interdisciplinary care plans related to his/her dominant language of Albanian and failed to ensure staff provided person-centered care and services to determine and support the Resident's communication needs. Findings include: Resident #57 was admitted to the facility in May 2019 and had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, major depressive disorder, and adjustment disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/9/24, indicated Resident #57's preferred language was Greek and requires an interpreter to communicate with his/her physician and health care staff. Review of the care plan for communication problems, initiated 5/12/19, indicated Resident #57 has a language barrier and prefers to speak in Albanian, but can understand some Greek…
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 · D2024-08-30 · 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 for one Resident (#251), out of 27 sampled residents. Specifically, for Resident #251, the facility failed to consistently provide activities based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan. Findings include: Resident #251 was admitted to the facility in August 2024 with the following diagnoses: dementia and behavioral disorders. Review of the medical record indicated Resident #251 was alert and confused at baseline. Review of the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Evaluation, dated 8/18/24, indicated the Resident scored 0 out of 15 indicating he/she was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #251's care plans included but were not limited to: -Focus: Resident admitted for long term care. Resident in need of 24 hour care and supervision, dated 8/16/24. Interventions: Encourage/involve in daily activities, dated 8/16/24 -Focus: Resident #251 is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from accident hazards for two Residents (#32 and #62), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to complete his/her quarterly smoking evaluations. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Smoking Policy and Procedure, dated as revised 11/1/2018, indicated but was not limited to: -All residents expressing the desire to smoke tobacco products or use E-cigarettes will be assessed upon admission to the center, when there is a change in status and quarterly. On 8/26/24 at 1:30 P.M. and 8/29/24 at 9:07 A.M., the surveyor observed Residents #32 and #62 smoking in the facility's designated smoking area with staff supervision. a. Resident #32 was admitted to the facility in June 2020 and had diagnoses including bipolar disorder and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/19/24, indicated Resident #32 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15 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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to monitor adverse consequences (side effects) of anticoagulant medications (used to prevent the blood from clotting; a blood thinner) for one Resident (#41), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Anticoagulation-Clinical Protocol, last revised November 2018, indicated but was not limited to: - Monitor and Follow-Up 5. The staff and physician will monitor for possible complications in individuals who are being anticoagulated, and will manage related problems. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility in January 2024 with diagnoses of atrial fibrillation and hypertension. Review of Resident #41's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 7/25/24, indicated Resident #41 had a moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15. Further review of the MDS indicated that Resident #41 received anticoagulant medication. Review of Resident #41's current Physician's Orders indicated but was not limited…
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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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's (#56) drug regimen was free from unnecessary psychotropic medications, out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure an as needed antipsychotic medication was limited to 14 days, or extended beyond 14 days with a documented clinical rationale and duration. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Antipsychotic Medication Use, last revised July 2022, indicated but was not limited to: - Policy Statement: - Residents will not receive medications that are not clinically indicated to treat a specific condition. - Antipsychotic medications will be prescribed at the lowest possible dosage for the shortest period of time and are subject to gradual dose reduction and re-review. - Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Resident will only receive antipsychotic medications when necessary to treat specific conditions for which they are indicated and effective. 16. PRN (as needed) orders for antipsychotic medications will not be renewed beyond 14 days…
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 · E2023-06-30 · 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 record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that concerns addressed by the Resident Council Group have sufficient follow-up to address and prevent recurrence. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Complaint/Grievance Policy and Procedure, undated, indicated 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. During the Resident Group interview on 6/28/23 at 11:08 A.M., nine residents were in attendance, and 8 of 9 residents reported: * Despite repeatedly voicing concerns, month after month, the staff speak Creole on the units, it continues. * Snacks are not passed at nighttime and if they ask the staff for a snack the staff say that they are too busy. The Resident Group suggested the surveyor look back at past year's monthly resident council minutes and said that these concerns are documented. Review of the past year's Resident Council…
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 · E2023-06-30 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — patternEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure four Residents (#75, #46, #31, and #21) were free from restraints, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #75, to assess the use of a rolled-up Hoyer pad and pillows under the fitted sheet on both sides of the Resident as a potential restraint; 2. For Resident #46, to assess the use of multiple blankets under the sheets on both sides of the bed as a potential restraint; 3. For Resident #31, to assess the use of blankets under the fitted sheet on one side of the Resident as a potential restraint; and 4. For Resident #21, to assess the Resident's bed up against the wall as a potential restraint. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Use of Restraints, dated 11/2020, included the following: - Restraints shall only be used for the safety and well-being of the resident and only after other alternatives have been tried unsuccessfully. - Restraints should only be used to treat the resident's medical symptoms and never 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 · Ecited before2023-06-30 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Activity of Daily Living (ADL) assistance was provided to four dependent Residents (#87, #40, #54, and #12), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, 1. Resident #87's facial hair was not removed timely; and 2. Residents #40, #54, and #12 were not supervised with eating. Findings include: 1. Resident #87 was admitted to the facility in December 2021 and had diagnoses that included dementia, anxiety disorder, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/6/23, indicated that on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam Resident #87 scored a 9 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS further indicated Resident #87 required 1 person physical assistance with personal hygiene. During an observation and interview on 6/27/23 at 8:02 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #87. He/she had long chin hair. Resident #87 said he/she would like it removed but the girls never do (it). During a record review on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to store food in sanitary conditions, specifically, label and date leftover food items and dispose of food items after their use by date. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Food Handling' indicated the following: *Foods that are prepared and not placed into service are considered unused portions. *Unused portions that have been properly handled, refrigerated, covered, labeled, and dated with use by dates or frozen and reheated and served according to the HACCP Food Flow Charts can be served by the use by date. *Foods that are marked with the manufacturer's use by date that are properly stored can be used until that date as long as the product has not been combined with any other food or prepared in any including portioning. Once a product has been prepared or portioned, a new use by date is established. Follow the use by dating guidelines (Appendix) to establish a new date. On 6/27/2023 at 7:19 A.M., the surveyor observed the following undated food items in the kitchen's refrigerator:…
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 · D2023-06-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a dignified existence for one Resident (#16), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: Resident #16 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 and had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/24/23, indicated that on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam Resident #16 scored a 6 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further indicated Resident #16 requires one person physical assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). During an interview on 6/27/23 at 7:50 A.M., Resident #16 said that he/she had been wearing the same underwear for four days and that his/her butt is itchy and sticky. Resident #16 said he/she had complained to all the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) each day for four days and that the CNAS have told Resident #16 that he/she has no underwear with his/her name on them. On 6/27/23 at 7:56…
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 before2023-06-30 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure two Residents (#16 and #54) consented to the administration of an antipsychotic medication, prior to administration, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #16 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 and had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/24/23, indicated Resident #16 had received antipsychotic medication for five of the past seven days. Review of the current Physician's Orders indicated: * Resident #16 had an order, started 5/20/23, for Quetiapine Fumarate (an antipsychotic medication) Oral Tablet 25 milligrams (mg). * Resident #16 did not have an order to have his/her Health Care Proxy (HCP) activated. Review of the paper and electronic medical records failed to indicate the Physician had activated Resident #16's HCP, therefore Resident #16 is deemed to be his/her own person. Further review failed to indicate Resident #16 deferred to family to sign consents on his/her behalf.…
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 · D2023-06-30 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to provide meal choices and preferences for one Resident (#27), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Dining and Food Preferences, dated as revised September 2017, indicated the following: *The individual tray assemble ticket will identify all food items appropriate for the Resident/patient based on diet order, allergies & intolerances, and preferences. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility in February 2023 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/28/23, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. During an observation and interview on 6/27/23 at 8:47 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #27 eating breakfast in his/her room. Resident #27 told the surveyor that he/she does not always get all the food items on his/her meal ticket. Resident #27 said that he/she reviews the meal tickets at each…
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 before2023-06-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, records reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to implement the plan of care for three Residents (#451, #54 and #82), out of a total of 26 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #451, to ensure nursing implemented a physician's ordered bed alarm for a resident with a history of a fall with injury; 2. For Resident #54, to implement the orthotic/splint care plan; and 3. For Resident #82, to develop a communication care plan. Findings include: 1. Resident #451 was admitted to the facility in September 2022 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, muscle weakness, and glaucoma. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/8/23, indicated Resident #451 had one fall in the past month. Review of the Physician's Order, dated 6/15/23, indicated: * Alarms: Bed alarm - Check function and placement every shift Review of the plan of care related to falls, dated 6/15/23, indicated: * Resident #451 uses bed electronic alarm. Ensure the device is in place as needed. During observations on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-30 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 revise the plan of care related to advanced directives for one Resident (#451), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Advanced Directives, undated, indicated: * The plan of care for each resident will be consistent with his or her documented treatment preferences and/or advanced directives. Resident #451 was admitted to the facility in September 2022 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia, muscle weakness, and sleep apnea. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/8/23, indicated that Resident #451 was coded: Do Not Resuscitate- NO Review of the Massachusetts Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST), dated 6/8/23 and 6/10/23, indicated: Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) Do Not Intubate and Ventilate (DNI, DNV) Review of the Physician's Order, dated 6/20/23, indicated: Code Status: DNR, DNI, DNV. May transfer to hospital. Review of the plan of care related to advanced directives, dated…
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 before2023-06-30 · 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 observations, records reviewed, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of care were followed related to physician's orders for two Residents (#63 and #4) out of 26 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #63, to obtain weekly weights, per the physician's order; and 2. For Resident #4, to ensure the physician's orders were implemented for a.) a stop sign outside of his/her room, and b.) the application of compression stockings (TEDs). Findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Weight Surveillance, undated, included the following: * Resident weights are an important indicator of nutritional and overall health status. * Licensed nurse is to enter the weights into the resident's record. Resident #63 was admitted to the facility in December 2020 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, type 2 diabetes, and dysphagia (difficulty chewing and swallowing). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 5/25/23, indicated Resident #63 was assessed by staff to have severe…
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 · D2023-06-30 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure quality care was provided to one Resident (#451), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, on 6/5/23 Resident #451 fell while in the facility and sustained a subdural hematoma and laceration to his/her right forehead and was transferred to the hospital. Resident #451 returned on 6/8/23 with four sutures to his/her right forehead. On 6/27/23, 6/28/23 and 6/29/23 (24 days after the sutures were inserted) the sutures were still in Resident #451's right forehead and nursing failed to obtain a suture removal date. Findings include: Resident #451 was admitted to the facility in September 2022 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia, muscle weakness, and sleep apnea. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/8/23, indicated Resident #451 could make self understood and he/she could understand others. Review of the Hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated on 6/5/23…
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 · D2023-06-30 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that routine devices (hearing aids) used to maintain hearing were provided for one Resident (#451), out of 26 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide and implement the use of hearing aids for Resident #451 who was hard of hearing. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care of Hearing Aids, undated, indicated the purpose is to maintain the resident's hearing at the highest attainable level. Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of resident. Documentation: 3. If the Resident refused the procedure, the reason(s) why and the intervention taken. Reporting: 1. Notify the supervisor if hearing aid is damaged or needs to be sent to the dealer for cleaning. 2. Notify the supervisor if the resident complains or problems related to hearing and/or the hearing aid or has a wax build up in the ear. 3. Report other information in accordance with facility policy…
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 before2023-06-30 · 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, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the Weight Surveillance policy for one Resident (#87), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility did not obtain monthly weights as ordered for Resident #87 and did not reweigh Resident #87 when a 12.5% weight loss was recorded to ensure accuracy of the weight obtained. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Weight Surveillance, undated, indicated the following: * Reweighs are to be obtained if there is a three (3) pound discrepancy from previous weight. Licensed staff will do re-weigh and notify unit manager if discrepancy is accurate. * Unit manager will report to the Physician, Dietitian, MDS coordinator and Responsible Party, any significant, unplanned weight loss or gain. * Dietitian to reassess and document interventions to address significant weight loss or gain. Resident #87 was admitted to the facility in December 2021 and had diagnoses that included dementia, anxiety disorder, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-30 · 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 observations, record reviews, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain respiratory equipment according to professional standards of practice for two Residents (#27 and #452), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. To label the oxygen tubing and clean the filter as ordered; and 2. To implement a physician's order for dating and initialing nebulizer tubing, and to store a nebulizer face mask to prevent possible contamination. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Administration via nasal Canula, mask, CPAP, BiPAP, undated, indicated the following: * Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. * Review the Resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility in February 2023 with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/28/23, indicated that on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-30 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that pharmacy recommendations were reviewed and addressed for three Residents (#21, #12, and #86), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Pharmacy Recommendations Protocol, undated, included but was not limited to: * Pharmacy Recommendations will be received via email or physical copy given to Unit Manager by pharmacy consultant. A Consultant Pharmacist Medication Regimen Review will be included. The original regimen review will be obtained by the DON [Director of Nurses] and a copy given to the unit manager. Unit Responsibilities 1. Nursing recommendations will be reviewed and addressed. 2. MD/NP [Medical Doctor/Nurse Practitioner] recommendations will be reviewed with MD/NP/PA [Physician's Assistant] and follow-through completed based on direction. 3. Unit will note follow-through action on the original follow through listing and return it to the DON when all recommendations have been addressed. 1. Resident #21 was admitted to the facility…
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 · D2023-06-30 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 reviews, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure it was free from a medication error rate of greater than 5 percent. Two out of four nurses observed made 3 errors in 36 opportunities on two of three units resulting in a medication error rate of 8.33%. These errors impacted two Residents (#20 and #95), out of seven residents observed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Administering Medications, undated, indicated the following: Policy Statement: Medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. Policy Interpretation and Implementation *2. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders, including any required timeframe. *3. Medications must be administered within one (1) hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified (for example, before and after meals orders). Nurse must write reason if not given timely. 1. During a medication pass on 6/28/23 at 8:12 A.M., the surveyor observed Nurse #1 prepare and administer the following medication to Resident #20: *…
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 · D2023-06-30 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#4) was free from a significant medication error, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, Resident #4 was administered an antibiotic twice daily for 14 days instead of twice daily for 14 doses (7 days) as indicated by the hospital discharge summary and discharge prescription. Findings include: Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in November 2022 with diagnoses including right fibula fracture, diabetes, and heart disease. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/16/23, indicated Resident #4 can make self understood and he/she can understand others. Review of the Hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #4 was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection. The summary indicated to administer antibiotics as prescribed. The discharge summary indicated for Cefpodoxime (antibiotic) 200 milligrams (mg) by mouth two times a day and to dispense 14 tablets (7 days). Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-30 · 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 observations, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed: 1. To ensure medications were stored securely in 2 out of 4 resident care units, and 2. To ensure medications with shortened expiration dates were labeled and dated after being opened in 2 out of 3 medication carts. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Medications, undated, indicated the following: Policy statement: The facility shall store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. Policy interpretation and implementation. *The facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals. All such drugs shall be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed. *Multi-dose vials which have been opened or accessed (e.g., needle- punctured) should be dated and discarded within 28 days unless the manufacturer specifies a different (shorter or longer) date for that opened vial. *Compartments (including, but not limited to drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes) containing drugs and biologicals shall be locked when not…
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 · D2023-06-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure they maintained a complete and accurate medical record for one Resident (#4), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, for Resident #4, the physician's ordered calcium carbonate tablet did not have a dose as required. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Orders, undated, indicated the purpose is to establish uniform guidelines in the receiving and recording of medication orders. -medication orders- when recording orders for medication specify the type, route, dosage, frequency and strength of the medication ordered. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in November 2022 with diagnoses including right fibula fracture, diabetes, and heart disease. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/16/23, indicated Resident #4 can make self understood and he/she can understand others. Review of the Physician's Order, dated 8/16/22, indicated: -Tums Tablet Chewable (Calcium Carbonate Antacid) Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day 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.
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| MENTAKIS, MICHAEL | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 10/23/2023 |
| DELINCE, DANIELLE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 11/01/2023 |
| HOPKINS, JOANNA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2016 |
| HOULARES, PAMELA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 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.
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 85% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
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 225418. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, 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.