Leominster Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
44 Keystone Drive, Leominster, MA 01453 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 106 certified beds · (978) 537-9327 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2024
- 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 1 actual-harm citation
- 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 $26,033 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-02)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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 | 24.3% | 16.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.1% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 55.1% | 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 | 2.8% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.9% | 15.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 26.4% | 19.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.5% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.5% | 4.2% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.5% | 21.2% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.5% | 21.4% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.7% | 77.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.1% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.3% | 11.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.56 | 1.88 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.35 | 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.
44.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 57 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 57.1% 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 35 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 0.11 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 7% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 37% 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 | 44.3%CMS range 31.6–53.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 6.8–17.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 57.1% | 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 | 45.7% | 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 | 48.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 10.4%CMS range 5.1–20.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 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 106 beds and averages 69.4 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 37 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.41 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.36 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.13 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 3.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 32 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-07-02 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for care, the Facility failed to ensure he/she was free from physical abuse and mental anguish, when on 06/11/24 during the evening shift (3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M), Resident #1 refused to transfer to bed, he/she became combative with staff and in response, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 physically restrained Resident #1, to which Resident #1 said stop, you're hurting me! CNA #1 yelled at Resident #1 telling him/her he was the captain, and forced Resident #1 to transfer into bed against his/her will. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy titled Abuse Prevention Program, dated as revised April 2021, indicated that the Facility's residents have the right to be free from abuse, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual, 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 · E2025-11-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biologicals in accordance with State and Federal requirements. Specifically,1. The facility failed to ensure that medications were dated once opened, according to manufacturer's guidelines in two of two medication carts observed.2. The facility failed to ensure medication and treatment carts were locked while a nurse was not present on all units.Findings include:Review of the facility policy Medication Labeling and Storage, dated February 2023, indicated The facility stores all medications and biologicals in locked compartments. Compartments containing medications and biologicals are locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items are not left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others. Multi-dose vials that have been opened or accessed are dated and discarded within 28 days unless the manufacturer specifies a shorter or longer date for the open vial. 1. During a medication…
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 · D2025-11-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to maintain a clean and comfortable home like environment for one Resident (#40) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically, Resident #40's privacy curtain was soiled with a blood-like substance. Findings include:Review of facility policy titled Homelike Environment, dated February 2021, indicated the following:-Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment and encouraged to use their personal belongings to the extent possible.-The facility staff and management maximizes, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect personalized, homelike setting. These characteristics include: a clean, sanitary and orderly environment. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility in September 2021 with diagnoses that included schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and chronic kidney disease. Review of Resident #40's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 9/3/25, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. On 11/18/25 at 7:49…
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 before2025-11-19 · 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to develop a plan of care for one Resident (#29) and failed to implement a plan of care for two Residents (#4 and #51) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically:1. For Resident #29 the facility failed to develop a plan of care for a pacemaker.2. For Resident #4 the facility failed to implement a physician's order for the use of a low air loss mattress.3. For Resident #51 the facility failed to implement a physician's order for a soft blue boot to the left foot. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Pacemaker, Care of a Resident with dated revised September 2023 indicated the following: For each resident with a pacemaker, document the following in the medical record and on pacemaker identification card on admission: a. The name address and telephone number of the cardiologist. b. Type of pacemaker. c. Type of leads. d. Manufacturer and model. e. Serial number. f. Date of implant. g. Paced rate. 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 · D2025-11-19 · 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 implement Occupational Therapy (OT) recommendations for one Resident (#47) for the treatment of a contracture to the left hand. Specifically, the facility failed to implement the use of an orthotic device for the maintenance and treatment of a contracture. Findings include:Review of facility policy titled Resident Mobility and Range of Motion, dated as revised July 2017, indicated the following:-Residents with limited range of motion will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent a further decrease in ROM (range of motion).-Residents with limited mobility will receive appropriate services, equipment and assistance to maintain or improve mobility unless reduction in mobility is unavoidable. Resident #47 was admitted to the facility in April 2024 with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, other reduced mobility, Review of the 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 · Dcited before2025-11-19 · 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 interview, the facility failed to complete a trauma screen and develop a comprehensive trauma care plan related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) that identified triggers and interventions for one Resident (#40) out of a total of 21 sampled Residents. Findings include:Review of facility policy, titled Trauma Informed Care and Culturally Competent Care, dated as revised August 2022, indicated the following:-Purpose: to guide staff in providing care that is culturally competent and trauma-informed in accordance with professional standards of practice and to address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization.-Trauma- informed care is an approach to delivering care that involves understanding, recognizing and responding to the effects of all types of trauma. A trauma- informed approach to care delivery recognizes the widespread impact and signs and symptoms of trauma in residents and incorporates knowledge about trauma into care plans, policies,…
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 before2025-07-29 · 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
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who had an indwelling catheter and whose Physician's orders included daily irrigation of the indwelling catheter, the Facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was provided with catheter care including but not limited to catheter irrigation, in accordance with his/her Physician's orders. Findings include:Review of the Facility policy titled Catheter Irrigation, Open System, revised October 2010, indicated the following: The purpose of this procedure is to maintain patency of the catheter.Unless specifically ordered by the Physician, do not apply a clamp to any catheter. Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in February 2012, diagnoses included but not limited to Multiple Sclerosis (nerve damage that disrupts communication between the brain and the body that can result in numbness, weakness, and trouble walking), Dementia, and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Review of Resident #1's July 2025 Physician's orders related to indwelling catheter care indicated the following:Acetic Acid…
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 · D2025-07-29 · 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 records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who had a gastrostomy tube (G-tube, placed through the abdomen into the stomach, for feedings, liquids and medications) in place to meet his/her nutritional and fluid intake needs, and whose physician's orders included specific administration rates and volumes for formula feeds and water flushes, the Facility failed to ensure that Resident #1 was provided with appropriate treatment and services when Resident #1 was administered formula feeds and flushes at an incorrect rate and volume.Findings include:Review of the Facility policy titled Enteral Feeding-Safety Precautions, date revised November 2018, indicated the following:All personnel responsible for preparing, storing and administering enteral nutrition formulas will be trained, qualified and competent in his or her responsibilities.The facility will remain current in and follow accepted best practices in enteral nutrition. Preventing errors in administration: Check the following information: rate of administration (ml/hour- [milliliter…
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 · E2024-09-12 · 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
Based on interview, record review, and review of the Facility Assessment Tool, the facility failed to ensure that Licensed Nurses (#6, #1, #5, and #4) had the specific competencies and skill sets to care for the needs of one Resident (#372) relative to nephrostomy tube (a thin flexible tube that is surgically inserted through the skin, into the kidney and drains urine into a bag outside the body) care. Specifically, facility staff failed to ensure Licensed Nurses were assessed for competency to care for nephrostomy tubes when: -Resident #372 was admitted to the facility with bilateral (right and left side) nephrostomy tubes. -The Facility Assessment indicated staff at the facility could provide care for residents with diseases of the genitourinary (genital and urinary organs or functions) system and that special treatments provided included ostomy (surgically created opening between an internal organ and the body's surface) care. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment, dated 8/7/24, indicated the following: -Diseases and conditions typical for a resident in the facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-12 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviewed and interview, the facility failed to ensure that the Director of Nursing (DON) did not serve as the Charge Nurse when the facility had an average daily occupancy of greater than 60 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the DON did not serve as Charge Nurse, providing direct resident care, when the facility's daily occupancy was greater than 60 residents: -on four dates during the Quarter Three (April 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024) Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report period where the facility reported excessively low weekend staffing. -on three dates over the four week time frame prior to the survey start date of 9/6/24. Findings include: Review of the facility's Quarter Three PBJ Staffing Data Report indicated the facility reported excessively low weekend staffing. Review of the facility's Daily Nursing Attendance Reports for the Quarter Three reporting period indicated the DON served as Charge Nurse on the following four dates: -5/15/24 (Wednesday) on the Back Unit, on the Night (11:00 P.M. through 7:00 A.M.) Shift. -5/18/24…
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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, policy and record review, the facility failed to provide one Resident (#59), out of a total sample of 17 residents, the right to participate in their plan of care. Specifically, the facility failed to inform Resident #59 in advance of a medication treatment and the risks and benefits of the medication when the Resident was prescribed a new anti-psychotic (type of medication used to treat symptoms of psychosis including hallucinations [sights, sounds, smells, tastes, or touches that a person believes to be real but are not real] and delusions [false beliefs]) medication. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Psychotropic Medication Use, revised July 2022, indicated: -Residents, families, and/or the Representative are involved in the medication management process. -When determining whether to initiate, modify, or discontinue medication therapy, the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) conducts an evaluation of the resident. The evaluation will attempt to clarify whether .the actual and intended benefit of the medication is understood by 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.
Show the remaining 32 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-12 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the Physician of a significant change in condition for one Resident (#16), out of a total sample of 17 Residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to notify the Physician/Nurse Practitioner (NP) so treatment could be altered when Resident #16 was identified with significant weight loss by the Registered Dietician. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Weight Management, undated, indicated: -Newly admitted residents are weighed weekly for four weeks. -Residents are weighed a minimum of monthly by the 7th of each month, with more frequent weights obtained as ordered or deemed necessary. -Check the previous monthly weight(s) for any significant weight change. If there is a significant weight change of plus/minus 5 percent (%) in 30 days (1 month), 7.5% in 90 days (3 months) or 10% in 180 days (6 months), schedule the resident to be reweighed within 24 hours. -Weights are verified and documented in the medical record as they are obtained. -The entire interdisciplinary team (IDT) must be involved…
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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the plan of care was assessed and revised for two Residents (#6, #21) and that a care plan meeting was held for one Resident (#59), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1. For Resident #6, assess and revise the Resident's Care Plan to include measurable goals for falls prevention after the Resident sustained a fall. 2. For Resident #21, obtain a Physician order and revise the Resident's Care Plan to include the use of mattress bolsters and floor mats after the Resident sustained a fall. 3. For Resident #59, provide evidence that an interdisciplinary care plan meeting was held, or that the Resident had participated in the care planning process following an MDS assessment completed on 4/18/24. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Planning - Interdisciplinary Team, revised March 2022, indicated: -Comprehensive, person-centered care plans are based on 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 · D2024-09-12 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to provide services that met professional standards of quality for one Resident (#25), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to transcribe (to put into written word or print) a verbal order (a Physician order that is received in person via spoken word or over the telephone) for a medication change into the medical record, resulting in the verbal order not being implemented and Resident #25 not receiving an updated medication as ordered by the Physician. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Telephone Orders, revised February 2014, indicated: -Verbal telephone orders may be accepted from each resident's attending Physician. -Verbal telephone orders may only be received by licensed personnel (Registered Nurse (RN), Licensed Professional Nurse (LPN), Pharmacist, Physician, etc.). -Orders must be reduced to writing (transcribed), by the person receiving the order, and recorded in the resident's medical record. Resident #25 was admitted to the facility in March 2024, 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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, policy and record review, the facility failed to provide activities to meet the needs of one Resident (#28), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide activities of interest for Resident #28 based on their plan of care, comprehensive assessment, and preferences. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Activity Evaluation, revised June 2018, indicated: -The activity evaluation is used to develop an individual activities care plan .that will allow the resident to participate in activities of his/her choice and interest. -The activity evaluation and activities care plan identifies if a resident is capable of pursuing activities independently or if supervision and assistance are needed. Resident #28 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses including Dementia (a group of conditions characterized by impairment of at least two brain functions, such as memory and loss of judgment). Review of the Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to provide an environment was free of accidental hazards, relative to swallowing safety during one meal for one Resident (#10) out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, facility staff failed to provide Resident #10 with necessary interventions, in accordance with the Resident's plan of care, to ensure the Resident's safety while eating his/her breakfast meal when the Resident had a diagnosis of Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), required staff assistance for securing his/her dentures in place, and required verbal cues for safety while eating, which increased the Resident's risk for choking. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Assistance with Meals, revised March 2022, indicated the following: -Residents should receive assistance with meals in a manner that meets the individual needs of each resident. -Facility staff will serve resident trays and will help residents who require assistance with eating. Resident #10 was admitted to the facility in February 2016 with diagnoses…
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 before2024-09-12 · 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
Based on interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate care and services for a nephrostomy tube (a thin flexible tube that drains urine from the kidney into a bag outside the body) according to professional standards of practice for one Resident (#372), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to flush Resident #372's nephrostomy tubes as ordered by the Physician to prevent blockage and increased risk of infection. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Nephrostomy Tube Care, revised October 2010, indicated: -The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the care of the resident with a percutaneous (through the skin) nephrostomy tube. -Verify that there is a Physician's Order. -Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident. Review of the facility policy titled Catheter Care, Urinary, revised 9/2014 indicated: to maintain an unobstructed urine flow. Review of the Management of Patients with Nephrostomy Tubes: Nursing toolkit, revised November…
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 before2024-09-12 · tag F0742 — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, policy and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for one Resident (#59), out of a total sample of 19 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: -to develop an individualized care plan to address the emotional and psychosocial needs of Resident #59, -to monitor and provide ongoing assessment as to whether the care approaches were meeting the emotional and psychosocial needs of the Resident after he/she experienced Suicidal Ideation (SI- verbal expressions of thoughts of harming oneself that may or may not lack specific intent), and -to review and revise the Resident's care plan after expression of SI, hospitalization, and re-admission to the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Behavioral Assessment, Intervention, and Monitoring, revised March 2019, indicated: -Nursing staff will identify, document, and inform the Physician about specific details…
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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy and record review, and interview, the facility failed to review and address the Pharmacist Medication Review recommendations for two Residents (#6 and #56), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. For Resident #6, verify and/or confirm that the Pharmacist recommendations were reviewed or addressed. 2. For Resident #56, verify and/or confirm that the Pharmacist recommendations were reviewed or addressed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, titled Documentation and Communication of Consultant Pharmacist Recommendations, undated, indicated: -A record of the Consultant Pharmacist's observations and recommendations is made available in an easily retrievable form to Nurses, Physicians, and the care planning team. -Comments and recommendations concerning drug therapy are communicated in a timely fashion. -The Consultant Pharmacist and the facility follows up on his/her recommendations to verify action has been taken. 1. Resident #6 was admitted to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, policy and record review, the facility failed to ensure that one Resident (#59), out of a total sample of 17 residents, was free from the risks of side effects resulting from the unnecessary use of psychotropic medications. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that appropriate monitoring for adverse consequences and side effects via an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessment (a clinical outcome checklist completed by a healthcare Provider to assess the presence and severity of adverse outcomes, such as abnormal movements of the face, limbs, and body) was completed timely in accordance with standards of practice. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Psychotropic Medication Use, revised July 2022, indicated: -Psychotropic medication management includes: <adequate monitoring for efficacy and adverse consequences; and <preventing, identifying, and responding to adverse consequences. -Residents receiving psychotropic medications are monitored for adverse…
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 before2024-09-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for one Resident (#14), out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to document medicated lotion treatments administered to Resident #14's lower extremities as ordered by the Physician. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Charting and Documentation, revised July 2017, indicated: -All services provided to the resident .shall be documented in the resident's medical record. The medical record should facilitate communication between the interdisciplinary team regarding the resident condition and response to care. -The following information is to be documented in the resident medical record: <Treatments or services performed <Medications administered Resident #14 was admitted to the facility in August 2024 with diagnoses including Need for Assistance With Personal Care, Adult…
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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, policy and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for three Residents (#14, #42 and #45) out of a total sample of 17 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - infection prevention practice of wearing gown and gloves to reduce transmission of multi-drug resistant organisms [MDRO's-resistant bacteria that are resistant to three or more types of antimicrobial drugs] during high contact [touching] Resident care for Resident #14 as ordered by the Physician. 2. ensure that Resident's #42 and #45 were free from the risk of infection when Resident #38 expelled emesis (vomit) while seated at the same lunch table, and the facility staff did not offer to replace the Resident #42 and #45's plated meals. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), revised…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had severe cognitive impairment, the Facility failed to ensure he/she was treated in a dignified and respectful manner, when on 07/31/24, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 sat next to Resident #1, with her legs outstretched crossed, raised and extended on top of Resident #1's lap, across both armrests of his/her wheelchair, and enticed him/her to play with her legs and hair to keep him/her calm. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy, titled Resident Rights, dated as revised February 2021, indicated that Federal and State laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to a dignified existence and to be treated with respect, kindness, and dignity. Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in December 2023, diagnoses included Parkinson Disease, dementia, history of falling, schizoaffective disorder, and depression. Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 06/19/24, indicated Resident #1 had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · 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
Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who had severe cognitive impairment, the Facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was free from the use of a physical restraint when Facility staff failed to assess whether or not the use of a concave mattress and bed rails on his/her bed, prevented him/her from getting out of his/her bed. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy, titled Use of Restraints, dated as revised April 2017, indicated the following: -physical restraints are defined as any manual method, or physical, or mechanical device, material or equipment attached to adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot remove easily, which restricts freedom of movement or restricts access to one's body, and -the definition of a restraint if based on the functional status of the resident and not the device. If the resident cannot remove a device in the same manner in which the staff applied it given that resident's physical condition, and this restricts his/her typical ability change position or place,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-29 · 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
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who had severe cognitive impairment and had been repeatedly attempting to stand unassisted, the Facility failed to ensure they reported an allegation of abuse by use of a restraint by a staff member, to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH), when after being notified by the Director of Social Services, the Director of Nurses witnessed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA #1 sitting next to Resident #1 (who was seated in his/her wheelchair) with her legs raised, crossed and extended across his/her lap, with her legs positioned across both of the armrests to Resident #1's wheelchair. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation-Reporting and Investigating, dated as revised, September 2022, indicated the following: -all reports of resident abuse, including injuries of unknown origin, neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property, are reported to local, state, and federal agencies, (as required by current…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · 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
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff to meet his/her care needs, the Facility failed to ensure that after being made aware on 07/31/24 of an allegation of a possible restraint, that they obtained and maintained evidence that a thorough investigation was completed. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation-Reporting and Investigating, dated as revised, September 2022, indicated the following: -all reports of resident abuse, including injuries of unknown origin, neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property, are reported to local, state, and federal agencies, (as required by current regulations), and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of all investigations are documented and reported, Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in December 2024, diagnoses included Parkinson Disease, dementia, history of falling, schizoaffective disorder, and depression. 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 · D2024-08-29 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for care, the Facility failed to ensure a Bed Rail Entrapment Assessment was completed prior to putting two quarter rails in the upright position while he/she was in bed. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy titled Bed Safety and Bed Rails, dated as revised August 2022, indicated the following: -the resident's sleeping environment is evaluated by the interdisciplinary team, -bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails are checked for comparability and size prior to use, and -the use of bed rails or side rails (including temporarily raising the sides rails for episodic use during care) is prohibited unless certain criteria for use of the bed rails have been met, including attempts to use alternatives, interdisciplinary evaluation, resident assessment, and informed consent. The Policy also indicated that Resident assessment also determines potential risks to the resident associated with the use of bed rails,…
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 before2024-07-02 · 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
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of one sampled Employee Files, the Facility failed to ensure staff implemented and followed their Abuse Policy when a Criminal Offender Record Inquiry (CORI) was not conducted on Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 prior to his date of employment at the Facility as required, and in accordance with the Facility's Abuse Policy. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation Prevention Program, dated as revised April 2021, indicated that as part of resident abuse prevention, the administration will: - develop and implement policies and protocols to prevent and identify abuse or mistreatment of residents, neglect of residents; and/or theft, exploitation or misappropriation of resident property - conduct employee background checks and not knowingly employ or otherwise engage any individual who has been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, or mistreatment by a court of law. Review of CNA #1's Employee File indicated his first date of employment at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-14 · 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 records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had an indwelling urinary catheter (a flexible tube used to empty the bladder and collect urine into a drainage bag), the Facility failed to ensure nursing developed an individualized comprehensive care plan with interventions, treatment goals and outcomes that addressed his/her risk for complications associated with an indwelling urinary catheter. Findings include: Review of the Facility's policy, titled Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plans, with a revision date of March 2022, indicated the following: -A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. -The comprehensive, person-centered care plan reflects currently recognized standards of practice for problem areas and conditions. Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in May 2023, diagnoses included…
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 before2024-02-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who had a pressure injury (injury to skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure on the skin) to the coccyx and an indwelling urinary catheter (a flexible tube used to empty the bladder and collect urine into a drainage bag), the Facility failed to ensure they maintained a complete and accurate medical record when nursing failed to transcribe his/her wound care orders and indwelling urinary catheter care orders, in a timely manner, upon readmission to the Facility. Findings include: Review of the Facility's policy, titled Pressure Ulcers/Skin Breakdown-Clinical Protocol, with a revision date of December 2023, indicated the following: -The physician will order pertinent wound treatments, including wound cleansing and debridement approaches, dressings, and application of topical agents. -The nurse shall describe and document current treatments. Review of the Facility's policy, titled Catheter Care, Urinary,…
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 · F2023-06-27 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — widespreadRegularly 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to inspect all resident beds annually for the 2022 year, including mattresses, frames, and bedrails for possible areas of entrapment as required. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Bed Safety and Bed Rails, dated August 2022, included: - Maintenance staff routinely inspects all beds and related equipment to identify risks and problems including potential entrapment risks. - The Maintenance department provides a copy of inspections to the Administrator . Review of the facility's Center Bed Rail Assessment Tracking Log, undated, included no evidence that all resident beds, including mattresses, frames, and bedrails had been assessed for possible areas of entrapment in 2022. During an interview on 6/21/23 at 9:47 A.M., the Administrator said the facility required all resident beds to be assessed annually for potential areas of entrapment. She said the Center Bed Rail Assessment Tracking Log provided to the surveyor included no evidence that all resident beds were assessed in the 2022 year for potential…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-27 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop 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
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to complete a thorough background screening for one staff member (Nurse #1), out of three sampled staff members, prior to Nurse #1's employment start at the facility. Specifically, the facility failed to complete a criminal background check or Professional Nurse License Check for Nurse #1 before the Nurse began working at the facility on a resident unit. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Background Screening Investigations, dated March 2019, included: - Background checks would be completed for all potential direct access employees . - Background checks would be initiated within two days of an offer of employment .and completed prior to employment. - For any licensed professional applying for a position that may involve direct contact with residents, his/her respective licensing board would be contacted to determine if any sanctions have been assessed against the applicant's license. Review of the Nursing Daily Attendance Reports, dated 4/26/23 and 4/27/23, indicated Nurse #1 worked 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 · E2023-06-27 · tag F0636 — patternAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 1b. The facility failed to ensure its staff comprehensively assessed Resident #170's cognitive patterns and mood on one MDS Assessment, when the Resident was identified as having adequate hearing, usually understood others, and was sometimes understood. Review of Resident #170's MDS Assessment, dated 5/17/23, Section B, indicated the Resident had adequate hearing, usually understood others, and was sometimes understood. Further review of Sections C (Cognitive Patterns) and D (Mood) indicated : Not Assessed. During an interview on 6/22/23 at 11:34 A.M., the MDS Coordinator said staff were required to assess cognitive patterns and mood on the MDS assessment for residents who usually understood others and were usually understood. The MDS Coordinator reviewed Resident #170's comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 5/17/23, at that time and said staff should have assessed the Resident's cognitive patterns and mood when they completed the MDS assessment as required, but they did not. Based on record review and 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 · Dcited before2023-06-27 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the Physician and the Resident's Responsible Party/ family member in a timely manner, of the unavailability and multiple missed doses of the anxiolytic (anti-anxiety) medication for one Resident (#271), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: -Notify the Physician and the Responsible Party/ family member when multiple missed doses of prescribed anti-anxiety medication, Klonopin was not administered to Resident #271. Findings include: Review of facility policy last revised June 2023, indicated: -medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. -if a drug is withheld, refused, or omitted, the individual administering the medication shall document in the EMAR (Electronic Medication Administration Record), notify the Physician and responsible party if necessary. Resident #271 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of the Physician's Orders for June 2023 indicated an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-27 · 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
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to implement the facility's policies relative to abuse reporting. Specifically, the facility staff failed to immediately report two incidents of resident to resident altercations, involving three Residents (#170, #30, and #19), but not later than two hours after the altercations occurred. Findings include: Review of the Abuse Investigation and Reporting Policy, dated 2001 and provided by the facility, included: -An alleged violation of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment will be reported immediately, but not later than two hours if the alleged violation involves abuse or has resulted in serious bodily injury . a. Facility staff failed to report a physical resident to resident altercation within the required time frame of immediately or not later than two hours after Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 witnessed Resident #170 pull Resident #30's facial hair. Resident #170 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 with diagnoses including Vascular Dementia with agitation. Resident #30 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 · D2023-06-27 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a Baseline Care Plan within 48 hours of admission for one Resident (#18), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy for Baseline Care Plans, last revised March 2022, indicated that a baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate health and safety needs is developed for each resident with forty-eight hours of admission. Resident #18 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with diagnoses including Wedge Compression Fracture of the Second Lumbar Vertebra and Lower Back Pain. Review of Resident #18's clinical record did not indicate any evidence that a Baseline Care Plan had been developed within 48 hours, as required. During an interview on 6/22/23 at 7:27 A.M., Nurse #6 said that he was unable to locate Resident #18's Baseline Care Plan and that he would speak to his Director of Nurses (DON). During an interview on 6/22/23 at 8:09 A.M., the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator said that the Baseline Care Plan should be completed within 48 hours of admission or on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-27 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADLs-bathing, dressing, grooming) care for one Resident (#42), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure Resident #42 was provided grooming per his/her preference/comfort. Findings include: Resident #42 was admitted to the facility in April 2022 with a diagnosis of Dementia. Review of the ADL Care Plan, initiated 4/15/22, indicated Resident #42 had a self care deficit and included the following interventions: -Provide assist of one staff with dressing, grooming and bathing. -Can be dependent at times related to weakness/fatigue. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 4/1/23, indicated Resident #42 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine out of 15, had no behaviors including rejection of care, and required extensive assistance of one staff with dressing and personal hygiene/grooming. On 6/21/23 at 8:58 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #42 near…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide an environment free of accidental hazards for one Resident (#170), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, for Resident #170, the facility staff failed to: -provide adequate supervision and assistance when the Resident was identified at risk for elopement, and had eloped from the facility. -investigate the elopement incident, and review and implement interventions to reduce further episodes of wandering/attempts to elope. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Wandering and Elopement revised, 10/1/10 indicated the following: -Patients will be assessed for elopement risk upon admission, re-admission, quarterly and with a change in condition as part of the nursing assessment process. -Those determined to be at risk will receive appropriate interventions to reduce risk and minimize injury. -Purpose: To provide a process for managing patients at risk for elopement. -Individual risk factors and patterns will be identified and addressed within the care plan. Review of the facility's policy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-27 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure dialysis (a process by which waste substances are removed from a patient's body) care and services were provided for one Resident (#121), out of one applicable resident who receive dialysis, out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that its staff: A. Coordinated timing of medication administration around the Resident's dialysis schedule. B. Maintained an ongoing communication record with the Dialysis clinic. Findings include: Review of the State Operations Manual (SOM), Appendix PP, (Rev. 211, 02-03-23), included the following guidance under Dialysis Care and Services under Shared Communication between the Nursing Home and the Dialysis facility: >It is essential that a communication process be established between the nursing home and the dialysis facility to be used 24-hours a day. >The care of the resident receiving dialysis services must reflect ongoing communication, coordination and collaboration between the nursing home and the dialysis staff. >The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-27 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess and provide individualized interventions for two Residents (#30 and #121), out of four applicable residents, out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to assess and provide interventions for Resident's #30 and #121 who were identified as having Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD- a mental health condition that is triggered by an event, series of events, or set of circumstances that is experienced by an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or life threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individual's functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or spiritual well-being), in order to mitigate and eliminate potential triggers that may cause re-traumatization. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Trauma Informed Care and Culturally Competent Care, revised August 2022, included the following: -Purpose: to address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization -perform universal screening 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 · Dcited before2023-06-27 · tag F0742 — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the staff provided appropriate treatment/services for one Resident (#30), out of a total sample of 18 residents, who was identified as having Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and was exhibiting signs/symptoms related to his/her possible trauma. Findings include: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 and had a diagnosis of Depression. Review of the Resident Matrix, provided to the survey team shortly after entrance on 6/21/23, indicated Resident #30 was identified as having PTSD/Trauma. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 5/10/23, indicated Resident #30 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, and had bilateral upper and lower range of motion deficits. During an interview on 6/21/23 at 9:59 A.M., Resident #30 said that he/she served in the military, was on active duty during the war and had experienced bodily harm related to his/her service, had recently lost his/her spouse unexpectedly, had a daughter…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-27 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that one Resident (#271), out of a total sample of 18 residents, was free of significant medication errors per facility policy and professional standards. Specifically, the facility failed to administer 15 doses of an anxiolytic (anti-anxiety) medication as ordered by a Physician for a total of eight days. Findings include: Review of facility policy last revised June 2023, indicated: -medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. -if a drug is withheld, refused, or omitted, the individual administering the medication shall document in the EMAR (Electronic Medication Administration Record), notify the MD (Physician) and Responsible Party if necessary. Resident #271 admitted to the facility in June 2023 with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of the Physician's orders for June 2023 indicated an order for Klonopin (anti-anxiety medication) 0.5 milligrams(mg) by mouth two times a day for Anxiety. Review of Resident #271's Medication Administration…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-27 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the required staff attended the scheduled quarterly Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program Meetings, as required. Findings include: During a review of the facility's quarterly QAPI meeting attendance sheets with the Administrator and Director of Nurses (DON) on 6/27/23 at 2:06 P.M., the Administrator said the staff required to attend the meetings include the Medical Director, the DON, and the Infection Preventionist (IP), and that these meetings occurred in January, April, July and October. The Administrator further said that there was no documented evidence that a quarterly QAPI meeting was held in January 2023, and that there was no documented evidence that the IP attended the April 2023 meeting, as required.
“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
$26,033 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $26,033 — penalty dated 2024-07-02
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 EPHRAM LAHASKY — 22 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 | 1 of 5 | 1.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.8★, 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| KATZ, MICHELLE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/08/2025 |
| MAJEKODUNMI, AKINDELE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/08/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself.
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 225355. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-19, 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.