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

Seven Hills Pediatric Center

22 Hillside Avenue, Groton, MA 01450 · Non profit - Corporation · 83 certified beds · (978) 448-3388 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (978) 448-3388 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0604) — cited Aug 2023Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation$8,278 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • 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 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-17)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
497 Main St · (978) 448-4001 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
100 Boston Rd · (978) 448-4300 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
250 Main St · (978) 448-9350 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Town Forest Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.3%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection8.3%1.8%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%15.5%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%3.4%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication72.8%19.5%18.9%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.7%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.2%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control0.0%21.2%21.2%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table0.0%21.4%17.1%check this — see note marked star below the table
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.4%1.4%better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ 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.

0.18U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

1.12
RN hours/ resident / day
1.00
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.04
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.15
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.72
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 83 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.15 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.12 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 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 3.48 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.43 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.28 to 0.72 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-25)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-16)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 records reviewed, interviews, and observations, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had a known history of placing toys in his/her mouth, and required direct supervision by staff while in his/her wheelchair, the facility failed to ensure he/she was provided with the necessary level of staff supervision to prevent him/her from ingesting an object not made for consumption. On 01/20/26, Resident #1 was able to access, remove and swallow a battery from a musical toy. Resident #1 was transferred to the Hospital, testing confirmed he/she had a battery in his/her abdomen, and he/she underwent an endoscopy (a procedure that uses a scope to examine the digestive tract) to remove the battery. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Incidents, with a review date of 05/2025, indicated the purpose of the policy was to ensure prompt and appropriate treatment to any resident sustaining and incident or accident and to prevent a recurrence.Review of the Report submitted by the Facility via the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS), dated 01/21/26,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who required the use of a mechanical ceiling lift for all transfers, the Facility failed to ensure that his/her safety was adequately maintained a during a transfer, when on 04/22/26, prior to moving Resident #1 from his/her wheelchair to his/her bed, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 did not completely secure all the loops (straps) of the lift pad to the overhead mechanical lift, and when she elevated Resident #1 in the lift, one of the straps (loops) became detached and his/her right side started to slip out of the lift pad, CNA #1 lowered him/her to the floor and Resident #1 hit his/her head on the floor.Findings include:Review of the Facility's policy, titled, Falls and Fall Risk, Managing, dated 2001, indicated that a fall is defined as unintentionally coming to rest on the ground, floor, or lower level.Review of the Report submitted by the Facility via the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS), dated 04/29/26, indicated that on 04/22/26 at around 4:30 P.M., CNA #1 was transferring…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on records reviewed, interviews, and observations, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was developmentally delayed and had a known history of placing toys in his/her mouth, the facility failed to ensure they developed and implemented a comprehensive individualized care plan specific to his/her oral fixations, associated risks and need for supervision, that included interventions, goals and outcomes. Findings include:Review of the Facility's policy, titled admission Assessment, with a review date of 05/2025, indicated the following:-An initial assessment of all new residents will be conducted by each discipline and re-assessments will be conducted when a change occurs and at specified intervals during the resident's stay.-The purpose is to obtain the necessary information to develop and maintain an individualized interdisciplinary plan of care with appropriate education and training about his or her illness and care needs.Review of the Report submitted by the Facility via the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS), dated 01/21/26, indicated Resident #1…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-11-25 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit direct care staffing data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the entire reporting period, Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter 3 2025 (April 1 - June 30), in accordance with the schedule specified by CMS.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Reporting, dated as revised February 2025, indicated but was not limited to:Policy: -The facility will submit complete and accurate PBJ staffing data to CMS no later than 11:59 PM ET on the 45th day following the end of each fiscal quarter, as required by CMS. All staffing data must be audible, standardized, and validated prior to submission. The facility will maintain all related records in accordance with CMS and MA DPH requirements and will make them available upon request during surveys or audits.During an interview on 11/24/2025 at 8:11 A.M., the Administrator said the business office completes the quarterly PBJ report and that he was unaware that the report had not been submitted for the third…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order for a phenobarbital (anti-seizure medication) level lab draw was implemented for 1 Resident (#4) of 24 sampled residents. Findings include:Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in March 2019 and has diagnoses which include cerebral palsy and seizure disorder. Review of Resident #4's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated severely impaired cognition (a Brief Interview for Mental Status examination was not performed), and that the Resident was prescribed an anti-convulsant medication. Review of Resident #4's care plan dated 6/25/25 indicated:- Maintain physical health related to seizure activity. Care plan interventions included, but were not limited to, Anticonvulsant levels as ordered by MD/NP. Review of Resident #4's physician orders indicated:- Phenobarbital oral tablet 100 mg (milligrams). Give 50 mg via g-tube in the afternoon for seizure. Give one half tab with 60 mg daily for a total…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-16 · tag F0552 — isolated
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain consent for the use of psychotropic medications as required for three Residents (#57, #73 and #80) out five residents reviewed, in a total sample of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Department of Nursing, Concern: Informed Consent for use Topic: Psychotropic medications, dated 5/22/19 indicated the following: -Prior to administering psychotropic medication listed on the schedule under subsection (b) the facility shall obtain written consent of the resident, the resident's health care proxy or the resident's guardian as required by M.G.L.c.111, Section 72BB. Attached Circular Letter 17-2699. Review of the Circular letter 17-2699, issued by: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services Department of Public Health Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality, dated February 1, 2017 indicated the following: -While prescribers are not required to complete this process each and every time…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-16 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to identify and assess the use of a Sleep Safe Bed (also known as institutional beds, adaptive beds, enclosed canopy beds, special needs beds, and child-safe beds) as a restraint for one Resident (#57) out of a total sample of 19 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to conduct individualized and ongoing assessments on the use of the Sleep Safe Bed for Resident #57. Findings include: Review of the facility's Physical Restraint Policy, dated April 2018 indicated: *A restraint is defined as any manual method or any physical or mechanical device, material, or equipment attached to or adjacent to the body that the individual cannot remove easily which restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body and environment. *Physical Restraints may be used: If the resident is at significant risk of self-injury or injury to others and no safer alternative or setting can be found. *The assessment process for the use of physical…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to implement the medical plan of care for one Resident (#72), out of a total sample of 19 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #72 had both his/her glasses and hearing device applied, to assist in his/her ability to hear and see. Findings include: Resident #72 was admitted to the facility in March 2022 with diagnoses that include Respiratory Failure, seizure disorder, and congenital glaucoma. Review of Resident #72's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #72 had severe cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for daily care, had moderate difficulty to hear, a hearing appliance was used, had highly impaired vision and used corrective lenses. Review of Resident #72's care plan with a start date of 1/20/23, focus of care and plan/services/approach: Resident will respond to multi-sensory cues during ADL, classroom and play experiences with changes in facial expressions, turning toward…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Physician orders for as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications that surpassed 14 days had a duration for continued use, as required for three Residents (#57, #73 and #80) out of a total sample of 19 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #57 was admitted to the facility in September 2018 with diagnoses including Epileptic Encephalopathy, developmental delay and intellectual delay. Review of Resident #57's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #57 was cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of Resident #57's Physician's orders indicated the following PRN (as needed) medications: Lorazepam (an anti-anxiety medication): 1 milligram (mg) every 8 hours for agitation, initiated 5/23/23. Lorazepam: 1 mg every 4 hours for seizure activity PRN, initiated 2/4/22. The Physician orders failed to include a stop date or review date as required. The clinical record indicated…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that food was stored in accordance with standards of practice for food safety. The facility also failed to ensure that the kitchen was maintained in a clean, sanitary manner. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, entitled Food Storage Policy, not dated, included the following: -All food must be labeled and dated. -All leftovers must be labeled and dated. -All food must be discarded after three days. -Any food item not dated will be discarded immediately. On 8/15/23 at 7:21 A.M., during a tour of the facility kitchen with the Food Service Director (FSD) present the following observations were made: *Reach in refrigerator #1: -A thermometer had an internal buildup of black substance, was dirty and unable to read. -A lunch in a bag, not dated or labeled that the FSD said belonged to staff, and removed it from the refrigerator. *Reach in refrigerator #2: -A large bag of dairy free yogurt, with a use by date of 8/5/23. -An individual cup of salsa, with a use by date 8/12/23 -The bottom shelf of…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, observations and policy review the facility failed to adhering to infection control practices during medication pass. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1) perform adequate hand hygiene throughout a medication pass. 2) adequately clean a mortar and pestle used for multiple residents. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Hand Hygiene revision date 8/2023 indicated the following: Indications for hand hygiene -Before touching a resident -Before clean or aseptic procedure -After body fluid exposure risk -After touching a resident -After touching a resident's surroundings -Before and after removing gloves Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration, revision date 8/2023, indicated the following: -Wipe clean mortar and pestle with gauze and alcohol in between residents. 1a. On 8/16/23 at 8:27 A.M., the surveyor observed Nurse #4 administering medications through a Gastrostomy/gastric tube (G-tube). Nurse #4 then doffed (removed) her gloves without performing hand hygiene, prepared the medication and began giving a Resident a…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,278 — penalty dated 2026-02-17

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
ANDREWS, CYNTHIAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/03/2022
ALTOMARE, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
GORDON, MELVINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
MAHAR, ROBINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2014
MATTHEWS, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2020

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

What families pay in MA

Paying with Medicaid

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.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225781. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-25, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next