Haverhill Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center
126 Monument Street, Haverhill, MA 01832 · For profit - Corporation · 128 certified beds · (978) 373-1747 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $29,749 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-06)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (56%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.0% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.6% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.9% | 1.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 49.7% | 15.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.9% | 3.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.8% | 15.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.8% | 19.5% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.2% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.3% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.8% | 21.2% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.8% | 21.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 79.8% | 77.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.8% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.5% | 11.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.21 | 1.88 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.24 | 1.50 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
58.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 330 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 53.7% 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 136 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 46% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 58.1%CMS range 53.0–63.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 13.1%CMS range 10.6–15.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 53.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 50.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 50.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 97.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 96.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.2%CMS range 4.5–9.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.81 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 128 beds and averages 118.2 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.69 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is well above 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
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
43 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-02-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
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 on 11/28/24 was re-admitted to the Facility during the day shift and per nursing required assistance of two staff members for bed mobility and during the provision of care because he/she had not been re-evaluated by rehab. The Facility failed to ensure he/she was provided the necessary level of staff assistance during care, when the Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) assigned to meet his/her care needs for the evening shift was not given report by nursing regarding his/her change in care status, the CNA provided care alone, Resident #1 rolled out of bed to the floor, and sustained a head laceration that required two staples to close. Findings include: The Facility's Policy, titled Falls Management Program, dated 01/2018, indicated it is the policy of the Facility to ensure that the resident environment remains as free from hazards as is possible and to provide adequate supervision and assistance devices to reduce the risk 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.
- Actual harm · G2024-05-30 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 address a new onset of limited range of motion for one Resident (#18) out of a total of 23 sampled residents. Findings include: On 5/30/24 the Administrator informed the the surveyor that the facility does not have a policy regarding limited range of motion or contracture management. Review of the National Library of Medicine articles titled Range of Motion and Limited Range of Motion 9/20/22, indicated: Range of motion (ROM) means the extent or limit to which a part of the body can be moved around a joint or a fixed point; the totality of movement a joint is capable of doing. Range of motion of a joint is gauged during Passive ROM (assisted) PROM or Active ROM (independent) AROM. ROM is usually assessed during a physical therapy assessment or treatment. Normal values depend on the body part, and individual variations. The purpose of ROM exercises are prevention of the development of adaptive muscle shortening, contractures,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-04-24 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective way to track and measure performance of the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), dated 3/1/25, indicated the following: - It is the policy of this facility to develop, implement, and maintain an effective, comprehensive, data-driven QAPI program that focuses on indicators of the outcomes of care and quality of life and addresses all the care and unique services the facility provides. - The QAPI plan shall address the following elements: * Process addressing how the committee will conduct activities necessary to identify and correct quality deficiencies. Key components of this process include, but are not limited to, the following: * Tracking and measuring performance. * Establishing goals and thresholds for performance improvements. * Monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of corrective…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to maintain a system for preventing, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections and communicable diseases for all residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program, dated revised 2/1/24, indicated that the facility maintains an infection prevention and control program to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections as per accepted national standards and guidelines. Further review indicated a system of surveillance is utilized for prevention, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections and communicable diseases for all residents . Review of the facility's infection control line listing dated January 2025 indicated that the name of the resident, the suspected infection, the signs and symptoms a resident is exhibiting, the dates of treatment, the antibiotic prescribed and the name of the organism is documented. Further review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-04-24 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review and interview the facility failed to implement an Antibiotic Stewardship Program to promote and monitor the appropriate use of antibiotics. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Antibiotic Stewardship -Review and Surveillance of Antibiotic Use and Outcomes dated revised December 2016 indicated that antibiotic usage and outcome data will be collected and documented using a facility approved antibiotic surveillance tracking form. The data will be used to guide decisions for improvement of individual resident antibiotic prescribing practices and facility-wide antibiotic stewardship. Further review indicated that the IP (infection Preventionist) will review antibiotic utilization as part of the antibiotic stewardship program and identify specific situations that are not consistent with the appropriate use of antibiotics. Further review indicated that the outcome of the use of the antibiotic will be reviewed and documented, but failed to indicate when that review will take place. Review of the current January, February and March 2025…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and/or implement care plans for two Residents (#68 and #67) out of a sample of 29 Residents. Specifically, 1. For Resident #68, the facility failed to develop a substance use disorder care plan. 2. For Resident #67, the facility failed to implement geri sleeves (skin protectors) to bilateral arms and legs. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled 'Safety for Residents with Substance Use Disorder' implemented on 3/1/25 indicated the following: -It is the policy of this facility to create an environment that is free of accident hazards as possible, for residents with a history of substance use disorder. -Care planning interventions will address risks by providing appropriate diversions for residents and encouraging residents to seek out facility staff to discuss their plan of care, including discharge planning, rather than leaving to seek out substances which could endanger the resident's health and/or safety. 1. Resident #68 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to respond to concerns voiced by residents in the monthly resident council meetings. Specifically, the facility failed to act promptly upon the grievances of the issues identified during the monthly resident council meetings. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled 'Resident Council' with a revision date of February 2021 indicated the following: -The facility supports residents' rights to organize and participate in the resident council. -The purpose of the resident council is to provide a forum for discussion of concerns and suggestions for improvement. -Council meetings are scheduled monthly or more frequently if requested by residents. The date, time and location of the meetings are noted in the activities calendar. -A Resident council response form will be utilized to track issues and their resolution. The facility department related to any issues will be responsible for addressing the item (s) of concern. A review of the Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a prompt resolution or follow up on a grievance for one Resident (#41) out of a total sample of 29 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to follow up on a grievance regarding a lost hearing aid. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident and Family Grievances, dated 3/1/25, indicated the following: -It is the policy of this facility to support each resident's and family member rights to voice grievances without discrimination, reprisal or fear of discrimination or reprisal. -Prompt efforts to resolve include the facility acknowledgement of complaint/grievance and actively working toward resolution of that complain/grievance. -A resident or family member may voice grievances with respect to care and treatment which has been furnished as well as that which has not been furnished, the behavior of staff and other residents, and other concerns regarding their LTC (Long Term Care) facility stay. -The grievance official, or designee, will keep the resident appropriately apprised of progress…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#154) received care in accordance with professional standards of practice, out of a total sample of 29 residents. Specifically, for Resident #154 the facility failed to obtain physician's orders for the placement and care of a Midline (an intravenous (IV) line inserted into the upper arm to deliver medications and fluids over a longer period of time than a standard IV). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Midline/Extended Dwell Catheter, dated January 2022 indicated a prescriber's order is required for a vascular access device. Resident #154 was admitted to the facility in April 2025 with diagnoses including urinary tract infection, recent fall and high blood pressure. Review of the document titled Infusion Support Systems and dated 4/16/25, indicated that a Midline was placed in Resident #154's basilic vein of the right upper arm at 11:50 A.M. Review of the physician's orders dated April 2025 failed to indicate a physician's order for the placement of a Midline. Further…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain rehab services to maintain one Resident's (#88) activities of daily living (ADL) out of a total sample of 29 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting, dated March 2018 indicated the following: - Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs). - Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. - A resident's ability to perform ADL's will be measured using clinical tools, including the MDS (minimum data set) Review of the facility policy titled Patient Care Management- Evaluation and Treatment, dated 9/8/21, indicated the following: - All patients identified as needing an assessment of functional status and potential to benefit from…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide services to maintain adequate hearing for one Resident (#41) out of a total sample of 29 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to assist the Resident with replacing his/her lost hearing aid. Findings include: Resident #41 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses including left femur fracture, anemia, and anxiety. Review of Resident #41's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicates the Resident has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Exam score of 13 out of 15 which indicates he/she is cognitively intact. The MDS also indicates Resident #41 requires substantial/maximal assistance from staff for functional daily tasks. On 4/23/25 at approximately 11:00 A.M., during Resident Council Meeting, Resident #41 expressed to a surveyor that he/she was missing their hearing aid. The surveyor observed Resident #41 wearing a left hearing aid only and positioned herself on his/her left side for the duration 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that one Resident (#67) out of a total sample of 29 residents, received proper foot care (Podiatry services). Findings include: Resident #67 was admitted to the facility in January 2025 with diagnoses that included Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, myexedema coma (thyroid hormone regulation disruption), bipolar, and depression. Review of Resident #67's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed that he/she had a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 out of a possible 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairments. Further review of the MDS indicated Resident #67 required total dependence with personal hygiene. Review of the facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL's), dated 3/1/25, indicated the following: -The facility will, based on the resident's comprehensive assessment and consistent with the resident's needs and choices, ensure a resident's abilities in ADL's do not deteriorate unless…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow up on significant weight changes for one Resident (#94) out of a total of 29 residents. Findings include: Resident #94 was admitted in February 2025 with diagnoses including dysphagia (difficulty chewing/swallowing) Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated Resident #94 could not participate in the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam due to severe cognitive impairment. Review of the care plan for Resident #94 indicated Resident #94 is at altered nutrition and hydration status due to cerebral infarct and cognitive deficits. The care plan did not indicate any interventions related to nutrition. Review of the care plan indicated Resident #94 requires a tube feeding related to dysphagia. Review of the weight record for Resident #94 indicated the following weights: * 02/24/25 - 172 pounds * 03/06/25 - 151.1 pounds (12% significant loss from previous weight) * 03/10/25 - 172.1 pounds (12% significant gain from previous weight) *…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that respiratory care and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, were provided for one Resident (#97) out of sample of 29 residents. Specifically, 1. For Resident # 27, the facility failed to include a physician's order for the use of oxygen in the medical record and have oxygen set at a specified flow rate. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Administration dated revised October 2010, indicated to verify there is a physician's order for the administration of oxygen before applying. Further review indicated to review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident. 1. Resident #97 was admitted to the facility in April 2025 with diagnoses including asthma, anxiety and malnutrition. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated that Resident #97's cognition is moderately impaired as evidenced by a scored 10 out of 15 on the Brief Interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop a personalized Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) care plan for one Resident #68 out of a sample of 29 Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to develop a care plan for the Resident's experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the Resident. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled 'Trauma Informed Care implemented on 3/1/25 indicated the following: -It is the policy of this facility to provide care and services which, in addition to meeting professional standards, are delivered using approaches which are culturally competent, account for experiences and preferences, and address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing and/or re-traumatization. -The facility will use a multi-pronged approach to identifying a resident's history of trauma, as well as his or her cultural preferences. This will include asking the resident about triggers that may be stressors…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biological's in accordance with State and Federal requirements. Specifically; the facility failed to ensure medications were not left at the bedside for one Resident (#97) out of a total of 29 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Labeling and Storage dated 2001, indicated that the nurse is responsible for maintaining medication storage . in a clean, safe and sanitary manner. Further review indicated that medications stored at bedside are to be kept locked in a secure container. Resident #97 was admitted to the facility in April 2025 with diagnoses including asthma, anxiety and malnutrition. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated that Resident #97's cognition is moderately impaired as evidenced by a score of 10 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Further review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 follow a physician's order for a fluid restriction for one Resident (#46) out of a total sample of 29 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Fluid Restriction, dated 3/1/25, indicated the following: - It is the policy of this facility to ensure that fluid restrictions will be followed in accordance to physician's orders. - The fluid restriction distribution will take into consideration the amount of fluid to be given at mealtimes, snacks, and medication passes. - Water will not be provided at bedside unless calculated into the daily total fluid restriction. - The resident has the right to refuse the fluid restriction, and if refused, documentation should support the reason for the refusal, the education of the risks and benefits, and any supporting documentation of the resident's continued refusal, assessment for any changes in condition related to the refusal, and the notification of the physician about the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #2) who had an invoked Health Care Proxy (HCP), the Facility failed to ensure they obtained written Informed Consents for his/her psychotropic medications from his/her HCP, prior to administering the medications. Findings include: The Facility's Policy titled, Psychotropic Medication Management and Informed Consent, dated 01/2022, indicated it is Policy of this Facility that psychotropic medications or medications identified with psychoactive properties shall not be administered to a resident without Informed Written Consent. The Policy indicated in addition, these drugs are not given (schedule or PRN (as needed)) unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record. The Policy indicated documentation of Informed Consent is required for any medication that is used in the treatment of a psychiatric diagnosis or symptom, which includes drugs to treat depression,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-30 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure for one Resident (#162) out of two applicable residents out of a total sample 23 residents that professional standards of care were developed and implemented for the care of a hemodialysis access site. Specifically, the care and treatment of an internal jugular (IJ) catheter, (a type of central venous catheter that is inserted in the internal jugular vein for hemodialysis). Findings include: Resident #162 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses that include, but are not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, end stage renal disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. (Hemodialysis is a treatment for advanced kidney failure that filters wastes, salts and fluid from your blood). Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #162 had intact cognition with a score of 13 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam, required partial to moderate assistance with most…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-30 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 ensure licensed nursing staff possessed the appropriate competency and skills to care for one Resident (#162) out of two applicable residents, requiring dialysis, out of a total sample of 23 residents, and 2. the facility failed to ensure nursing staff had been provided with education or demonstrated necessary competencies to care for residents in the facility with specialized needs, inclusive of dialysis care and treatment. Findings include: Review of the Facility assessment dated [DATE] indicated that for specialized services, on average, the facility has an average of three residents receiving IV medications, two residents receiving dialysis, and 38 residents receiving injections. The Facility Assessment also indicated: Staff training/education and competencies: Staff that are hired all go through facility orientation. On day two, new employees receive 8 hours of dementia training inclusive of abuse, neglect, non-pharmacological…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review and interview the facility failed to ensure staff stored all drugs and biologicals in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice. Specifically: 1. The facility failed to properly secure medications and medication carts on two of three units. 2. The facility failed to ensure medication carts were kept clean and orderly on one out of three medication carts reviewed. Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled Medication Storage in the Facility, December 2019, indicated, Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. The facility policy further indicated Medication storage areas are kept clean, well-lit, and free of clutter and extreme temperatures and humidity. 1. During an observation on 5/28/24 at 6:59 A.M.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, the resident group meeting and test tray results, the facility failed to ensure foods provided to residents were prepared by methods that conserve nutritional value, flavor, were palatable and at appetizing temperatures on 3 out of 3 units. Findings include: Review of the facility Food Temperature policy, undated, indicated: Keep the temperature of potentially hazardous cold foods no greater than 41 degrees F. During the screening portion of the survey, numerous residents expressed concerns about poor food quality, palatability, and temperature. During the Resident Group Meeting conducted on 5/29/24 at 2:05 P.M., the Residents said the following: -The food is yuck -The food is institutional All 17 residents participating in the meeting said that hot food is not served hot and that cold food items are not served cold. The residents said this occurs for all three meals. The residents also said they have brought up their concerns around their meals during meetings and are told…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and prepare food under sanitary conditions in the facility's main kitchen. Findings include: During a kitchen walk through on 5/28/24 at 7:05 A.M., the following was observed: - nine cases of food directly on the floor of the food storage room. - one tray of cinnamon buns unlabeled and not dated. - a container of opened whole milk that was undated and unlabeled. - a container of opened Lactaid milk that was undated and unlabeled. - a container of opened orange juice that was undated and unlabeled. - two containers of opened Half & Half that were undated and unlabeled. - two containers of opened cranberry juice that were undated and unlabeled. - one plastic to go cup of Boba tea open and without a date. - two gallons of applesauce open and not dated. - one quart container of pureed orange colored fruit open and not dated. - one quart container of pineapple chunks open and not dated. - a tray of Jello and fruit cups open and dated 5/21/24. - a tray of pasta tortellini open and not dated. - one pound of ham open,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure 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, policy review and interview the facility failed to ensure two Residents (#14 and #97) were free from restraints out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. identify and assess the use of side rails in conjunction with a scoop mattress as a potential restraint for Resident #14. 2. identify and assess the use of pillows wedged up against the side rails extending to the knees, as a potential restraint for Residents #97. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Guidelines for the Use of a Restraint, dated as revised November 2016, indicated that the definition of a restraint is any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material, or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot remove easily which restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body. Also included as restraints are facility practices that meet the definition of a restraint, such as: using side rails that keep 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-30 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse prohibition policy for one Resident (#97) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #97, the facility failed to ensure nursing immediately reported an allegation of potential abuse (bruise of unknown origin) to the Director of Nursing or Administrator, as required. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation of Resident Property and Exploitation, dated October 2022 indicated that possible indicators of abuse include but are not limited to an injury that is suspicious because the source of the injury is not observed . Further review indicated that when alleged violations involving abuse .including injuries of unknown source the following procedure should be followed: Immediately notify the Administrator or Director of Nursing in the Administrators absence. Resident #97 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with diagnoses including…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of potential abuse/neglect to the state agency as required for one Resident (#97) out of a total of 23 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation of Resident Property and Exploitation, dated October 2022 indicated that possible indicators of abuse include but are not limited to an injury that is suspicious because the source of the injury is not observed . Further review indicated that when alleged violations involving abuse .including injuries of unknown source the following procedure should be followed: Immediately notify the Administrator or Director of Nursing in the Administrators absence. Initiate an investigation, identifying and interviewing all involved persons including all staff on the unit, documenting all interviews. Further review indicated that an initial report will be submitted via the web to the Health Care Facility Reporting System…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin and failed to maintain evidence that a thorough investigation was completed for one Resident (#97) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation of Resident Property and Exploitation, dated October 2022 indicated that possible indicators of abuse include but are not limited to an injury that is suspicious because the source of the injury is not observed . Further review indicated that when alleged violations involving abuse .including injuries of unknown source the following procedure should be followed: Immediately notify the Administrator or Director of Nursing in the Administrators absence. Initiate an investigation, identifying and interviewing all involved persons including all staff on the unit, documenting all interviews. Resident #97 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview for one Resident (#99), out of a total sample of 23 residents, the facility failed to ensure baseline care plans were developed and implemented within 48 hours of admission. Findings include: Review of the Facility's policy titled 'Interdisciplinary Care Planning' dated as November 2017, indicated the following: 1. The facility will develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care within professional standards of quality care. 2. Baseline care plan must: a. Be developed within 48 hours of admission. b. Include the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for a resident including but not limited to: 1. Initial goals based on admission orders, ii. Physician's orders, iii. Dietary orders iv. Therapy services v. Social Service vi. PASARR recommendation, if applicable. Resident #99 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses including hemiplegia and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan with individualized interventions for two Residents (#108 and #64) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, 1. For Resident #108, the facility failed to develop care plans for activities of daily living, risk for falls and psychoactive medication use. 2. For Resident #64, the facility failed to implement the plan of care for air mattress settings. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Interdisciplinary Care Planning, dated as revised 11/2017 indicated the following: Comprehensive Care Plans. 3. The care plan process is not limited to developing a written plan but also addresses the ongoing execution of care, treatment, and services. The plan is continually reevaluated and modified to ensure the resident's needs are met. The plan includes the following: *Integrating the assessment findings into the care-planning process,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to prevent constipation and implement the bowel management protocol for one Resident (#108) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #108, with a known diagnosis of constipation, while also having physician's orders for narcotics to treat pain, (which contributes to risk for constipation), the facility failed to implement the bowel management protcol and failed to have monitored that Resident #108 had no documented bowel movements from 5/19/24 through 5/27/24. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, entitled 'Bowel Management Protocol', dated revised 9/2020 indicated the following: This facility is committed to providing a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and science-based approach to bowel management. Although aging increases the potential for incontinence and constipation, this facility has developed systems and procedures to assure: *Assessments are timely and appropriate *Interventions are defined,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the use of an indwelling urinary catheter had a clinical indication for its use for one Resident (#105) out of seven applicable residents in a total sample of 23 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Indwelling Catheter Management' dated as revised 4/2018 indicted the following: Standard: Indwelling catheters may be used for residents whose bladder problem is caused by medical reasons that cannot otherwise be treated and for which alternative therapy is not feasible: i.e. obstruction, terminally ill or severely impaired residents, and residents with pressure ulcers as short-term treatment. 1. admission: A. When a resident is admitted to the facility with an indwelling catheter, identify 1. Insertion type, 2. Type of catheter, 3. Catheter size, and 4. Balloon size. B. Review the resident's medical history to determine an indication for continued use: 1. Urinary retention that cannot be treated 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to adhere to professional standards for the administration of enteral feeding (nutrition taken through a tube directly to the stomach or small intestine) for one Resident (#91) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to implement the enteral feeding in accordance with the physician's order to receive the enteral feeding for 20 hours per day. Findings Include: Resident #91 was admitted to the facility in September 2022 with diagnoses that include dysphagia following cerebral infarction, gastrostomy tube and dementia. Review of Resident #91's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 3/5/24, indicated he/she was unable to participate in the Brief Interview for Mental Status Exam and was assessed by staff has having severe cognitive impairment. The MDS Assessment further indicated that Resident #91 utilizes a feeding tube. On 5/28/23 at 12:23 P.M., the surveyor observed staff bring Resident #91 out of his/her room in a wheelchair. Resident #91 was not connected to his/her enteral…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide care and maintenance of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC), consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#39), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #39 the facility failed to ensure nursing completed a PICC line dressing change as ordered by the physician. Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled Central Venous Access Device Catheter Dressing Change, dated January 2022, indicated the following: -Policy: 4. dressing changes will occur according to the IV (intravenous) order and when the dressing is compromised (Drainage/ moisture observed, loose, soiled). -Procedure: 16. document site assessment and procedure (dressing change) in resident's medical record. Resident #39 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses that include osteomyelitis left ankle and foot, pathological fracture left foot and cellulitis right and left lower limb. Review of Resident #39's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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, document review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an accurate account of a controlled medication was maintained. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure an accurate account of an Opioid; a Fentanyl patch (schedule II -controlled drug with a high potential for abuse, treats pain) was accurately maintained in the controlled substance accountability record book, as required, and failed to implement their policy for the potential discrepancy, loss and/or diversion of a controlled medication. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Discrepancies, Loss and/or Diversion of Medications, dated December 2019, indicated that immediately upon the discovery or suspicion of a discrepancy, suspected loss of diversion, the Administrator, Director of Nursing and the Consultant Pharmacist are notified and an investigation conducted. Further review indicated that if the loss is a controlled substance, the loss is documented. Resident #212 was admitted 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to provide special eating equipment and utensils for one resident (#101) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #101, the facility failed to provide built-up utensils with foam during meal service. Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled Adaptive Eating Equipment, dated 2/12/24, indicated adaptive eating devices are pieces of equipment used by residents to enable them to achieve or maintain their highest practicable level of eating independence. The policy further indicated the Culinary Department sanitizes the utensils after each use and places the devices on the resident's tray as needed. Resident #101 was admitted to the facility in March 2024 with diagnoses that include rheumatoid arthritis, moderate protein calorie malnutrition and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of Resident #101's most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE] indicated a Brief Interview for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain accurate medical records in accordance with professional standards and practices for one Resident (#39) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #39 the facility inaccurately documented the changing of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) dressing. Findings include: Resident #39 was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with diagnoses that include osteomyelitis left ankle and foot, pathological fracture left foot and cellulitis right and left lower limb. Review of Resident #39's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 5/22/24, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating that Resident #39 is cognitively intact. The MDS further indicated that Resident #39 is on IV antibiotics and has a central line/ IV access. On 5/28/24 at 9:30 A.M., the surveyor observed a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line in Resident #39's right arm. There was a red substance consistent with blood under the dressing at the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that staff transported linens to prevent the spread of infection on one out of three units. Findings Include: On 5/29/24 at 7:15 A.M., the surveyor observed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #5 exit a resident room on the Pentucket Unit with gloved hands carrying dirty, un-bagged linens and bring them into the dirty laundry room. On 5/29/24 at 7:17 A.M., the surveyor observed CNA #1 exit a resident room on the Pentucket Unit carrying dirty, un-bagged linen through the hallway and bring them into the dirty laundry room. On 5/29/24 at 7:37 A.M., the surveyor observed CNA #7 exit a resident room on the Pentucket Unit carrying dirty un-bagged linen through the hallway and bring them into the dirty laundry room. On 5/29/24 at 7:40 A.M., the surveyor observed CNA #5 exit a resident room on the Pentucket Unit with gloved hands carrying dirty, un-bagged linens and bring them into the dirty laundry room. On 5/29/24 at 7:44 A.M., the surveyor observed CNA #8 exit a resident room on the Pentucket Unit with gloved hands…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review and interview the facility failed to provide pneumococcal vaccination to two Residents (#101 and #93) who consented to receive the vaccine out of a five sampled residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #93, the facility failed to administer the pneumococcal vaccine after the Resident/ Resident Representative signed the consent for the vaccine on 8/17/23. 2. For Resident #101, the facility failed to administer the pneumococcal vaccine after the Resident/ Resident Representative signed the consent for the vaccine on an undated form. Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled Immunization & Vaccination of Residents, dated as revised January 2024, indicated It is the policy of this facility that all residents are offered immunizations and vaccinations that help in preventing infectious disease, unless medically contraindicated or otherwise ordered by the resident's attending physician or the facilities Medical Director. The policy further indicated 1. All residents will be offered influenza, Prevnar 13, pneumovax 23, Covid-19 vaccines upon…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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 a gap in the bed was filled to prevent possible entrapment for one Resident (#79) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Findings include: Resident #79 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses that include hemiplegia and hemiparesis, dysarthria, visuospatial deficit, and spatial neglect following cerebral infarction. Review of Resident #79's most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating that Resident #79 is cognitively intact. The MDS further indicated that Resident #79 is dependent for Activities of daily Living and rolling side to side in bed. On 5/28/24 at 7:51 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #79 laying in bed. There was a gap between the footboard and the end of the mattress. Resident #79 said his/her bed is uncomfortable and his/her feet hit the footboard. On 5/29/24 at 8:15 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #79…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 call lights were functional for one Resident (#38) out of a total of 23 sampled residents. Findings include: On 5/30/24, the surveyor was informed there was no facility policy regarding functioning call lights. Resident #38 was admitted to the facility in March 2024 with diagnoses including Parkinsons disease and asthma. Review of the Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #38 scored 15 out of a possible 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status Exam indicating he/she is cognitively intact. During an interview on 5/28/24 at 9:49 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #38's call light panel hanging off the wall. Resident #38 said that his/her call light had not been working all weekend (Saturday, Sunday and the Monday holiday), and he/she would yell out of help. Resident #38 said his/her roommate's call light was also not working so he/she would have to yell for his/her roommate too. Resident #38 said that staff were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-30 · tag F0948 — isolatedEnsure that paid feeding assistants have the training they need.
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 staff assisting residents with meals completed required training. Specifically, on 5/30/24, Unit Secretary #1 assisted Resident #18, who has a diagnosis of dysphagia, with his/her breakfast meal without having training. Findings include: During the entrance conference interview on 5/28/24 at 8:30 A.M., the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON) said that the facility does not utilize paid feeding assistants. Resident #18 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 with diagnoses including dementia and arthritis. A diagnosis of dysphagia was added to his/her clinical record in January 2024. Review of the Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #18 scored two out of a possible 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #18 is dependent on staff for eating, transfers and dressing. Review of Resident #18's SLP (speech therapy)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-22 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 cognitively impaired, the Facility failed to implement and follow their Abuse Policy, when on 12/25/23, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #2 allegedly heard CNA #1 being verbally abusive towards Resident #1. CNA #2 reported the allegation to Nurse #1, who then reported the incident to Unit Manager #1, however, Unit Manager #1 did not report the incident to the Administrator immediately, per facility policy. Findings include: Review of Facility's Policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, Misappropriation of Resident Property and Exploitation, dated October 2022, indicated the resident has the right to be free from abuse. The Policy indicated when alleged violations involving abuse is reported to or suspected by an employee, immediately notify the Administrator, or in the Administrator's absence, to follow the chain of command. Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in July 2023, diagnoses included vascular dementia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-05-30 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately completed to reflect the status of one Resident (#92) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to indicate on the MDS assessment that Resident #92 was on hospice services. Findings Include: Resident #92 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses that include chronic kidney disease, neoplastic (malignant) related fatigue and severe protein- calorie malnutrition. Review of Resident #92's most recent MDS indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 out of 15 indicating that the Resident has severe cognitive impairment. The MDS failed to indicate that Resident #92 was on hospice services. Review of Resident #92's physician orders indicated the following: -May be evaluated by Hospice, dated 4/10/24. -May be admitted to Hospice, dated 4/11/24. Review of Resident #92's care plan, revised 5/7/24, indicated he/she is on hospice services. During an interview on 5/30/24 at 8:43 A.M., the MDS Nurse said…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$29,749 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $12,948 — penalty dated 2025-02-06
- $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-05-30
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ATLAS HEALTHCARE — 29 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 4.4 | -1.4 vs chain |
The other 28 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WHITTIER MOP OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| WHITTIER NSH OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| JMH FAMILY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| JMH FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| MLS FAMILY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| MLS FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| SGS FAMILY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| SGS FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| WHITTIER 6 OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| MILLER, NACHUM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2025 |
| BAK, PINCHOS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| WHITTIER OPCO MANAGER LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| FEARING, KRISTINA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| NGOMBA, JASPER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| WOOD, PATRICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| GLEN OAK 11, LLC | Organization | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| MALT FAMILY TRUST | Organization | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| SGS 2010 FAMILY TRUST | Organization | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| TYH 2017 TRUST | Organization | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| GOLDBERGER, SHLOMO | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
| SONNENSCHEIN, MOSHE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/28/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
14 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
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.
This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225290. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-19, 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.