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

Regalcare At Harwich

111 Headwaters Drive, Harwich, MA 02645 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 135 certified beds · (508) 430-1717 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (508) 430-1717 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 24 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (24) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags

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) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
525 Long Pond Dr · (508) 430-4458 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
111 Chatham Road · (508) 432-5001 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
18 Tupelo Dr · (774) 207-7943 · Call to confirm hours
Park
75 Oak St · 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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 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 2 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 whose need for help with daily activities increased20.8%16.4%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.2%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.7%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms6.5%15.5%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.0%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.7%15.4%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.9%19.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.1%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.8%21.2%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table26.8%21.4%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.4%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine82.5%77.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.5%25.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.8%11.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.081.881.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.971.501.80typical

§ 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.

50.7% 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 310 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.23U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.4% 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 146 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 30% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 34% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.7%CMS range 44.7–55.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.9%CMS range 9.9–16.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge66.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge60.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge60.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting96.9%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge95.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.5%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 5.0–11.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.921.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.84
RN hours/ resident / day
0.49
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.95
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.28
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.63
RN hoursweekends
29.9%
Total nursing turnover
35.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 135 beds and averages 106.9 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 28 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.28 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.84 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.95 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 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.41 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-03)
8
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-13)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

24 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 14 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-07 · 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 records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), whose Advanced Directives indicated he/she was a full code (attempt resuscitation), the facility failed to ensure nursing provided care and services that met professional standards of nursing practice, when after Nurse #1 found Resident #1 unresponsive, without respirations and without a pulse, the physician was not made aware of Resident #1's change in condition, a Code Blue was not announced, 911 was not activated, therefore other nursing staff in the facility and Emergency Medical Service were not alerted to and could not respond to provide necessary assistance to Nurse #1 with attempts at resuscitation, as a result, the care and treatment provided to Resident #1 by Nurse #1 had not meet acceptable standards of practice. Findings include:Review of the Facility's Policy titled, Code Blue, dated as revised 4/2022, indicated the following:-residents/victims found to be unresponsive or who becomes unresponsive under…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-07 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolated
    Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was found unresponsive by nursing staff and whose Physician's orders indicated he/she was a full code (in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest, attempts at resuscitation will be initiated), the Facility failed to ensure nursing staff provided appropriate and necessary basic life saving measures to him/her that were consistent with his/her Advanced Directives and Physician orders. Findings include:Review of the Facility's Policy titled, Code Blue, dated as revised 4/2022, indicated the following:-residents/victims found to be unresponsive or who becomes unresponsive under observation, staff will call a Code Blue and code Blue will be paged overhead two times, the page will include the unit, location, and room number.-the nurse who is the first responder to the situation will determine the code status, lead the code, and remain with the patient throughout the code.-for a Full Code patient/victim: upon arrival to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2025-12-03 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — pattern
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#11) who required hemodialysis (a life sustaining treatment that helps the body remove extra fluids and waste products from the blood when the kidneys are not able to), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility failed:a. To ensure nursing staff did not obtain blood pressures from the Resident's right arm, where his/her AV fistula (arteriovenous fistula, where an artery and vein connect directly, allowing blood to flow) used for hemodialysis access was located; andb. To obtain and implement physician's orders for the care and maintenance of the Resident's hemodialysis catheter (a surgically placed catheter connected to a central vein that exits the skin and attaches to the tubing on the dialysis machine) upon his/her return from the hospital.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Care of a Resident with End-Stage Renal Disease, revised 4/2022, indicated, but was not limited to, the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-03 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two Residents (#95, #5), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility failed:1. For Resident #95, to ensure administration of antipsychotic and psychotropic medications were properly documented in the Resident's medical record; and2. For Resident #5, to ensure physician's orders were in place for the provision of Hospice services. Review of [NAME], Manual of Nursing Practice 11ed, dated 2019, indicated the following: -The professional nurse's scope of practice is defined and outlined by the State Board of Nursing that governs practice. Review of the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Nursing Advisory Ruling on Nursing Practice, dated as revised April 11, 2018, indicated: -Nurse's Responsibility and Accountability: Licensed nurses accept, verify, transcribe, and implement orders from duly authorized prescribers that are…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that medications were labeled and stored in accordance with accepted professional principles. Specifically, the facility failed:1. For Resident #121, to ensure the Resident's Insulin Lispro (a fast-acting insulin used to manage blood sugar levels) 100 units/milliliter (u/ml) Kwikpen was labeled with the date opened; and2. To ensure an open Lantus Solostar (a long-acting insulin used to manage blood sugar levels) insulin pen was labeled with a resident's name; and3. To ensure two bottles of Acidophilus (a probiotic over-the-counter medication) were stored in the refrigerator after opening as indicated by the manufacturer's label in two of three medication carts inspected.Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Storage, revised 3/2022, indicated, but was not limited to, the following:-The nursing staff shall be responsible for maintaining medication storage AND preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner.-The facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or…

    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 · D2025-08-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), the Facility failed to ensure he/she was treated in a dignified and respectful manner by a staff member when 07/27/25, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 teased Resident #1 and sat on his/her lap. Findings include:Review of the Facility Policy titled Resident Rights, dated as revised April 2022, indicated that employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. Review of the Report submitted by the Facility via the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS) dated 07/28/25, indicated that Resident #1's family (Family Member #1) was concerned with CNA #1's interaction with Resident #1, and that Family Member #1 thought his (CNA #1) behavior was bizarre in nature. During an interview on 08/28/25 at 7:22 A.M., Family Member #1 said she went to the Facility to visit Resident #1 and did not see him/her in his/her room, but could hear Resident #1 yelling, don't! Family Member #1 said she followed Resident #1's voice to Resident #2's room, opened the door, and saw CNA #1 sitting 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-13 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment was clean, comfortable, and homelike. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the residents' rooms and environment were maintained in good repair and homelike on two (Bayview and Cranview) of three resident care units. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Accommodation of Needs and Preferences and Homelike Environment, dated as last revised 4/20/22, indicated but was not limited to the following: -Environment refers to any environment in the facility that is frequented by residents, including (but not limited to) the residents' rooms, bathrooms, hallways, dining areas, lobby, outdoor patios, therapy areas, and activity areas. -Orderly is defined as an uncluttered physical environment that is neat and well-kept. -The resident's environment will be maintained in a homelike manner to ensure appropriate housekeeping, clean linens in good repair, private closet space for each resident. Between…

    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 · E2024-08-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, in accordance with professional standards. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure 2 out of 3 kitchenettes were maintained in a sanitary manner to store food. Findings include: Review of the 2022 Food Code by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), revised 1/2023, indicated but was not limited to the following: -A permanent temperature measuring device is required in any unit storing time/temperature control for safety food because of the potential growth of pathogenic microorganisms should the temperature of the unit exceed Code requirements. In order to facilitate routine monitoring of the unit, the device must be clearly visible. 3-305.11 Food Storage. (A) Except as specified in ¶¶ (B) and (C) of this section, FOOD shall be protected from contamination by storing the FOOD: (1) In a clean, dry location; (2) Where it is not exposed to splash, dust, or other contamination; On 8/8/24 at 11:25 A.M., the surveyor observed the following in the Bayview kitchenette with the Unit…

    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 · Ecited before2024-08-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the development and potential transmission of communicable diseases and infections for five Residents (#24, #19, #82, #16, and #57). Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #24, to ensure staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) as required for Isolation/Droplet Precautions (infection control precautions used for residents who are infected with certain infectious agents including COVID-19 for which additional precautions are needed to prevent infection transmission) while entering the room for medication administration; 2. For Residents #19 and #82, to ensure staff wore PPE as required for Isolation/Droplet Precautions while entering the room and providing morning coffee/snack and daily activity Chronicle; 3. For Resident #16, to ensure staff wore PPE as required for Contact Precautions (infection control precautions used for patients who may be infected with certain infectious agents for which additional precautions are…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-13 · tag F0551 — isolated
    Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a [NAME] Treatment Plan (court approved treatment plan for the administration of antipsychotic medications) was obtained prior to the administration of an antipsychotic medication for one Resident (#24), in a total sample of 20 residents. Findings include: Review of the website (www.mass.gov/[NAME]-guardianships) indicated but was not limited to the following: -A guardian for an adult is a person appointed by a judge in the Probate and Family Court who is responsible for making decisions for an individual after a judge has decided they aren't competent to make their own informed choices. Some guardians can make decisions about medical treatment for a person with mental illness that is considered extraordinary. These are called [NAME] guardianships. -At a [NAME] guardianship hearing, the person asking for the [NAME] guardianship asks the court to approve extraordinary medical treatment for an incapacitated person. This usually refers to treatment…

    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
Show the remaining 14 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident's comprehensive and individualized plan of care was implemented, for one Resident (#60), out of a total sample of 20 residents. Specifically, for Resident #60, the facility failed to place a padded floor mat to the left side of his/her bed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plan, dated 4/17, included but was not limited to: -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. - The care plan interventions are derived from a thorough analysis of the information gathered as part of the comprehensive assessment. -Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions change. -The Interdisciplinary Team must review and update the care plan when there has been a significant change in the resident's condition.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-13 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that for one Resident (#2), of a total sample of 20 residents, the pharmacy's monthly medication regimen review with recommendations for the Resident was reported to the attending physician and director of nursing and acted upon timely. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Regimen Review, dated November 2021, included but was not limited to the following: Policy: The consultant pharmacist performs a comprehensive review of each resident's medication regimen and clinical record at least monthly. The medication regimen review (MRR) includes evaluating the resident's response to medication therapy to determine that the resident maintains the highest practicable level of functioning and preventing or minimizing adverse consequences related to medication therapy. The MRR also involves a thorough review of the resident records, and may include collaboration with the resident, family members or other resident representatives. MRR also involves reporting of findings with recommendations…

    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 · D2024-08-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain medical records that are complete, accurate, and systemically organized within accepted professional standards and practice for one Resident (#91), out of a total sample of three closed records. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the physician's order for destination of discharge was accurate. Findings include: Resident #91 was admitted to the facility in July 2024 with diagnoses including hypertension, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and dementia. Review of a nurse's progress note, dated 7/22/24, indicated the Healthcare Proxy requested that referral be sent to Local skilled nursing facility (SNF) A for transfer as it was closer to family. Documents were sent to Local SNF A. Review of a Social Service's progress note, dated 7/23/24, indicated the social worker had reached out to Local SNF A who confirmed a bed offer had been approved for Resident #91. Resident #91 was transferring to Local SNF A by stretcher . by Ambulance company. Review of the Transfer/Discharge Evaluation-V7, 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, the facility failed to ensure facemasks were used by staff in the long term care setting as a method of source control during the Department of Health and Human services Federal public health emergency for COVID-19. Findings include: Review of the CDC guidance titled Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Healthcare Personnel During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic, updated September 2022, indicated but was not limited to the following: - Source control refers to use of respirators or well-fitting facemasks to cover a person's mouth and nose to prevent spread of respiratory secretions when they are breathing, talking, sneezing, or coughing. - Source control options for healthcare providers (HCP) include a well-fitting facemask. On 4/30/23 at 7:49 A.M., the surveyor observed signs posted at the entrance reception desk and in both elevators that indicated but was not limited to the…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-05-03 · tag F0888 — pattern
    Ensure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, policy review, and document review, the facility failed to implement a policy to grant COVID-19 vaccination exemptions for staff that included all the required components that were current and based on national standards for 2 of 2 reviewed exempt employees. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure documentation was complete for Activity Assistant #2 with a length of time the exemption was granted, and which authorized or licensed COVID-19 vaccine was clinically contraindicated for the staff member; and 2. Maintain completed documentation for Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #3 indicating which authorized or licensed COVID-19 vaccine was clinically contraindicated for the staff member. Findings include: Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Safety and Oversight memo: QSO-23-07-ALL, Attachment A, dated 10/26/22, indicated but was not limited to the following: - Vaccination Exemptions: Facilities must have a process by which staff may request exemption from COVID-19 vaccination based on an applicable Federal law. -To protect…

    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
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an individualized plan of care was followed for two Residents (#53 and #45), in a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #53, to follow the care plan of not providing paper products to the Resident who had a history of eating non-edible items; and 2. For Resident #45, to develop an individualized comprehensive plan of care following a new left clavicle fracture. Findings include: 1. Resident #53 was admitted to the facility in May 2021 with a diagnosis of dementia. Review of the Care Plans for Resident #53 included a Focus of behavioral problems including putting non-edible items in his/her mouth with a goal of not putting items in their mouth and interventions of removing all non-edible items from the food trays, supervising while eating to ensure he/she does not eat non-edible items and removing any non-edible objects from the room. Review of the printed meal tickets, provided by the kitchen to ensure correct dietary restrictions were followed on meal…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure quality care and services were provided for one Resident (#46), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure diabetic care was provided as ordered and documented correctly in the medical record. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Diabetes Protocol, dated as revised April 2022, indicated but was not limited to the following: - the staff and physician will manage hypoglycemia appropriately - it is important to avoid over-treatment of hypoglycemia, which can result in rebound hyperglycemia and hamper subsequent glucose control Resident #46 was admitted to the facility in March 2023 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus. Review of the medical record indicated Resident #46 was transferred to the hospital on 4/20/23 following a period of unresolved hypoglycemia (low sugar levels in the blood). Review of the progress note, dated 4/20/23 at 6:15 P.M. (18:15 military time), indicated the Resident was transferred in an…

    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 · D2023-05-03 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 ensure one Resident (#65), out of a total sample of 22 residents, received care and services consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent and/or promote healing of pressure injuries. Specifically, the facility failed to conduct a comprehensive skin assessment including the size of a newly identified right outer ankle wound and initiate a (pressure or non-pressure) form per facility policy. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Pressure Ulcer/Injury Risk Assessment, revised March 2022, indicated but was not limited to the following: -Risk factors that increase a resident's susceptibility to develop or to not heal PU/PIs include but are not limited to impaired/decreased mobility and decreased functional ability -Once the assessment is conducted and risk factors are identified and characterized, a resident-centered care plan can be created to address the modifiable risks for pressure ulcers/injuries -Conduct a comprehensive skin assessment with every risk…

    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 · D2023-05-03 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling catheter was assessed for removal following a urology consult for Resident #56, out of four residents with catheters and a total sample of 22 residents. Findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility in August 2022 and re-admitted to the facility in February 2023 with an indwelling Foley catheter. Review of the Hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #56 had a chronic Foley catheter and a urinary tract infection. Review of the medical record indicated Resident #56 did not have a catheter prior to the hospital admission in February 2023. Review of the Care Plans for Resident #56 indicated the Resident had a urinary catheter related to urine retention (initiated 2/20/23) with interventions of an antibiotic on 3/13/23 for four days and to follow up with Urology. During an interview on 5/3/23 at 10:00 A.M., Unit Manager #2 said the catheter was not in place prior to the Resident's hospitalization and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed for one Resident (#86), out of a total sample of 22 residents, to safely maintain and store respiratory equipment when not in use by the Resident. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure filters on the oxygen concentrator were clean and nebulizer respiratory treatment equipment was stored in a manner to prevent germs and environmental debris from contaminating it, potentially resulting in respiratory infection. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Administering Medications Through a Small Volume Handheld Nebulizer, dated as revised 4/2022, indicated but was not limited to the following: - the purpose of this procedure is to safely and aseptically (free of germs) administer aerosolized medication into the resident's airway - after the treatment is complete, rinse and disinfect the nebulizer equipment - when equipment is dry, store in a plastic bag with the resident's name and date on it Resident #86 was admitted to the facility in May 2021 with diagnoses including acute on chronic…

    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 · D2023-05-03 · tag F0711 — isolated
    Ensure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the physician reviewed the total program of care for Residents #56, out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the physician failed to review the total programs of care for the re-admission status of Resident #56 with a new Foley catheter. Findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility in August 2022 and re-admitted to the facility in February 2023 with an indwelling Foley catheter. Review of the Hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #56 had a chronic Foley catheter and a urinary tract infection. Review of the medical record indicated Resident #56 did not have a catheter prior to the hospital admission in February 2023. During an interview on 5/3/23 at 10:00 A.M., Unit Manager #2 said the catheter was not in place prior to the Resident's hospitalization and had reviewed the hospital discharge summary and was not sure why the hospital indicated the catheter was chronic, as it was new. 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary environment for one Resident (#17), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to maintain the cleanliness of the Resident's room to avoid a strong smell of urine for three consecutive days. Findings include: Resident #17 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 with diagnoses which included dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/9/23, indicated Resident #17 had an indwelling catheter. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment was not completed because Resident #17 was rarely/never understood. On 04/30/23 at 8:30 A.M., the surveyor smelled a strong smell of urine in the hallway by Resident #17's room. On 04/30/23 at 10:15 A.M., the surveyor smelled a strong urine smell outside Resident #17's room and upon entering the room, the strong smell of urine increased. On 4/30/23 at 4:15 P.M., the surveyor smelled the strong smell of urine outside Resident #17's room and a very strong smell of urine entering the room. On 5/1/23…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2025-12-03 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop 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 and interviews, the facility failed to review and revise the care plan for one Resident (#5), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the care plan for disposition was revised to reflect the Resident Representative's decision for the Resident to remain in the facility for long term care. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans, last revised 4/2022, indicated but was not limited to:-The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident.-The comprehensive, person-centered care plan will include the resident's stated preference and potential for future discharge, including his or her desire to return to the community and any referrals made to local agencies or other entities to support such a desire.-Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2024-08-13 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately completed for one Resident (#3), in a sample of 20 residents, and one Resident (#91), in a sample of three closed record reviews. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. To ensure the accurate admission date was reflected on three MDSs and limited range of motion was reflected on two MDSs for Resident #3; and 2. To ensure the accurate discharge location was reflected on the MDS for Resident #91. Findings include: 1. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 and developed a contracture. Review of the MDSs, dated 2/5/24, 5/2/24, and 8/1/24, indicated Resident #3 had an admission date of 11/24/23. During an interview on 8/13/24 at 10:15 A.M., MDS Nurse #1 said the MDSs inaccurately reflected the admission date for Resident #3 and would be updated to indicate the Resident was admitted in 2018. On 08/07/24 at 2:53 P.M., the surveyor observed Resident #3 wearing bilateral hand splints. Review of the Occupational Therapy Discharge Summary indicated services…

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

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to REGALCARE — 9 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 51.7+1.3 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 51.9+1.1 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.0+1.0 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.2+0.8 vs chain
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.7★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
REGALCARE AT HARWICH HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 04/09/2021
MIRLIS, ELIYAHUIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR100%since 04/09/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$13.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-4.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.2M
Related-party expense15% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 65%Medicare 16%Other / private 19%

This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$367per resident / day
operating cost
$11,166per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$353per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

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 225525. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-03, 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