D'Youville Senior Care
981 Varnum Avenue, Lowell, MA 01854 · Non profit - Corporation · 208 certified beds · (978) 458-4083 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 2 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 | 8.8% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.4% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.8% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.1% | 15.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.3% | 3.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.5% | 15.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.5% | 19.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.0% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.7% | 4.2% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.9% | 21.2% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 23.2% | 21.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.8% | 77.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 31.5% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.0% | 11.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.63 | 1.88 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.63 | 1.50 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
53.5% 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 253 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 45.5% 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 112 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 26% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% 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 | 53.5%CMS range 47.5–60.2 | 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 | 10.2%CMS range 7.6–13.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 45.5% | 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 | 45.5% | 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 | 41.1% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 4.0–9.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.64 | 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 208 beds and averages 197.6 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.79 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.20 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.89 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.24 to 0.10 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-29 · 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 records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who required daily administration of a diuretic and had been newly admitted from an acute care setting, the Facility failed to ensure he/she was free from a significant medication error, when his/her medication orders were not transcribed correctly by nursing, his/her Furosemide (diuretic) 80 milligrams was omitted and as a result, he/she was not administered his/her diuretic three days in a row.Findings include:The Facility Procedure, titled Incidents and Accidents, dated 01/30/24, indicated an incident was defined as an occurrence or situation that was not consistent with the routine care of a resident, and included medication errors. The Facility Policy, titled Medication Reconciliation, dated 01/30/24, indicated the Facility would:-During the admission process nursing would compare the Facility's orders to Hospital records, and transcribe orders.-Reconcile the resident's medications to ensure the resident was free from medication errors. -The Policy defined Medication Reconciliation as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-15 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that respiratory care and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, were provided for four Residents (#175, #139, #93 and #143) out of a total sample of 40 Residents. Specifically,For Resident #175 the facility failed to a). ensure that they obtained physician's orders for the use of CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure, used to treat obstructive sleep apnea) and b). store the CPAP mask and tubing in a bag.For Resident #139, Resident #93, and Resident #143, the facility failed to ensure the respiratory equipment was maintained in a sanitary condition. Specifically, the oxygen concentrators used to administer continuous oxygen had filters covered with a thick layer of dust. Findings include: 1. Review of facility policy titled CPAP, dated as revised 2/26, indicated the following:Procedure: Check MD orderTubing to be labeled with date and time, cleaned daily per manufacturer's instructions and changed…
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 before2026-04-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biologicals in accordance with State and Federal requirements. Specifically,1. For Resident #69 the facility failed to ensure medications were not stored at the bedside. 2. For Resident #175 the facility failed to ensure medications were not stored at the bedside.3a. The facility failed to ensure the treatment cart on the Sweet Land Unit was locked.3b. The facility failed to ensure the medication carts on the Sweet Land Unit, Short Term Rehab Unit and Wannalancit Unit were secured.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Storage in the Facility Bedside Medication Storage, dated 2024, indicated All nurses and aides are required to report to the charge nurse on duty any medications found at the bedside not authorized for bedside storage and to given unauthorized medications to the charge nurse for return to the family or responsible party. 1. Resident #69 was admitted to the facility in…
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 before2026-04-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically,The facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for five residents (#2, #48, #143, #33, and #183) out of a total of 69 residents who required the use of EBP.The facility failed to follow proper infection control practices for shared medical equipment, a). Nursing Staff failed to disinfect the blood pressure cuff between uses on the Sweet Land Unit and [NAME] Unit, and b). Nursing staff failed to disinfect a blood glucometer machine after use on the Wannalancit Lane Unit and c). failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene while performing blood sugar checks. The facility failed to ensure that staff performed hand hygiene between entering and exiting resident rooms and between glove…
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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff treated residents in a dignified manner for two Resident (#73 and #4) out of a total sample of 40 Residents. Specifically,1. For Resident #73 the facility failed to ensure the Physician did not dictate a history and physical at the nursing station in the presence of 14 residents, a laundry aide, a housekeeper, and a nurse. 2. For Resident #4 the facility failed to ensure the Hospice Nurse did not assess the Resident in a common area. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Residents Rights - Promoting and Maintaining Resident Dignity, dated as revised 4/26/23, indicated that it is the practice of this home to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident with respect and dignity as well as care for each resident in a manner and in an environment, that maintains or enhances resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality. 12. Maintain resident privacy. 1. Resident #73…
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 before2026-04-15 · 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 and implement individualized care plans related to pacemakers for two Residents (#130 and #172) out of a total of 40 sampled Residents and 13 total residents with cardiac pacemakers.Findings include: Review of the American Heart Association article titled Living with your Pacemaker, dated 10/29/24 indicated: Before you leave the hospital, your health care team will talk to you about problems to watch out for and things to avoid. You'll also receive a card with information about your pacemaker, when it was placed, its settings, your health care professional and the hospital. You should always carry this card with you. Make sure you understand your pacemaker's programmed lower and upper heart rate. Talk to your health care professional about the maximum acceptable heart rate above your pacemaker rate. Review of the facility's policy titled Use of Pacemaker policy dated 3/25/24 indicated:All residents with a pacemaker will be monitored…
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 before2026-04-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two Residents (#96, #78) out of a total of 40 sampled residents. Specifically:1.For Resident #96 the facility failed to a. implement physician's orders for booties to bilateral lower extremities while in bed and b. implement orders for bilateral fall mats on the floor while the Resident was in bed.2. For Resident #78 the facility failed to administer medications in accordance with professional standards. Findings include: Review of [NAME], Manual of Nursing Practice 11th edition, dated 2019 indicated the following: - The professional nurse's scope of practice is defined and outlined by the State Board of Nursing that governs practice. Review of the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Nursing Advisory Ruling on Nursing Practice, dated as revised April 11, 2018, indicated the following: Nurse's Responsibility and Accountability: Licensed nurses accept, verify,…
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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure standards of quality of care for the treatment of a pressure ulcer for one Resident (#124), who has a pressure ulcer, out of a total sample of 40 residents. Specifically, the nursing staff failed to ensure the intervention of the air mattress on Resident #124's bed was implemented in accordance with Resident #124's weight to assist with prevention and healing of the pressure ulcer. Findings include: Review of the manufacturer's operation manual titled, Med-Aire Melody Alternating Pressure Low Air Loss Mattress Replacement System, not dated indicated the following: Indications, the Med Aire Melody Alternating Pressure and Low Air Loss Mattress Replacement System, is indicated for the prevention and treatment of any and all stage pressure ulcers management program. Operating Instructions Step 6 Determine the patient's weight and set the control knob to that weight setting on the control unit. Resident #124 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 · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide foot care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#189) out of a total sample of 40 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #189 was scheduled to be seen by the podiatrist since admission to the facility resulting in thickened, yellow, long-curling toenails.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Diabetic Foot Care, dated and revised April 2016, indicated the following: - It is the policy of the facility of the facility to provide appropriate foot care to all diabetic residents/patients.- Do not cut toenails of any Resident/patient. Notify Podiatry if immediate intervention needed. Resident #189 was admitted to the facility in October 2025 with diagnoses including unspecified dementia and type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy.Review of Resident #189's most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 1/29/26, indicated that the Resident was unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam…
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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed for one Resident (#9), out of a total sample of 40 residents, to ensure acceptable perimeters of nutritional standards of practice were implemented when Resident #9 experienced a significant weight loss. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #9, who is assessed as being at risk of malnutrition and experienced a significant weight loss of 5.1% in less than a month, had the weight verified to determine/verify the significant weight loss, and when the reweigh occurred Resident #9 had continued weight loss of a total body weight loss of 6.44 % in less than 30 days, resulting in a delay to intervene to abate further weight loss. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, titled Weight Monitoring, with an effective date of 11/27/24 indicated the following: Based on the resident's comprehensive assessment, the home will ensure that all residents maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight 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.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and maintenance of a Midline Catheter (A midline catheter is an IV longer than 3 inches and it is inserted into the upper arm through the basilic, brachial or cephalic vein, with the catheter tip located at the or near the level of the axilla), consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#124), out of three reviewed Resident's with an IV catheter. Specifically, for Resident #124, the facility failed to ensure that the midline insertion site was able to be visualized.Findings include:Resident #124 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses that included adult failure to thrive, peripheral vascular disease, dementia, stage three pressure of the sacral region. Review of Resident #124's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/20/26, indicated he/she was assessed to have severe cognitive impairments. Review of Resident #124's physician ordered dated, 3/12/26, indicated Midline catheter Monitor IV insertion site every shift (Signing indicates:…
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 · D2026-04-15 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement standards of care related to dialysis for the 1 Resident (#78), out of 2 residents reviewed for dialysis, out of a total sample of 40 residents. Specifically, for Resident #78 the staff failed to ensure the dialysis order was signed off in accordance with the dialysis treatment schedule. (Hemodialysis is a machine that removes blood from the body, filters it through a dialyzer (artificial kidney) and returns the clean blood to the body). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Dialysis, revision date 4/2021 indicated this home will provide necessary care and treatment, consistent with professional standards of practice, physician's orders, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences, to meet the special medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs of resident receiving hemodialysis.14, The home will ensure that the physician's orders for dialysis include: b. 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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0712 — isolatedEnsure that the resident and his/her doctor meet face-to-face at all required visits.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#28) out of a total sample of 40 residents, was seen by the Physician at least every 30 days for the first 90 days after admission and at least every 60 days thereafter, with alternate visits by a Nurse Practitioner (NP) as indicated. Findings include:Resident #28 was admitted to the facility in March 2025 with diagnoses that included dementia and major depressive disorder. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 00 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment.Review of the medical record indicated Physician visit notes (from Physician #3), dated 3/17/25, 10/11/25 and 2/27/26.On 4/14/26 at 12:55 P.M., the surveyor requested all of Resident #28's physician and nurse practitioner progress notes since admission to the facility from the Director of Nurses (DON). The DON said that the Physician #3 typically hand writes his progress notes and places them…
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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure dental service recommendations were provided for one Resident (#130) out of a total of 40 sampled Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to obtain a consent form to begin denture fabrication for Resident #130. Findings include: Resident #130 was admitted to the facility in January 2025 with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation, epilepsy and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 1/15/26, indicated Resident #130 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a score of 15 out of a possible 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status Exam. The MDS also indicated that Resident had no natural teeth. During an interview on 4/13/26 at 8:12 A.M., Resident #130 said, I don't have any teeth and I need dentures. Resident #130 said that he/she had been seen by a dentist who recommended he/she get dentures, but it had been awhile and wasn't sure what the status was. Review of Resident #130's dental visit dated 2/26/26 indicated: Initial ExamPatient is edentulous. Patient…
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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure for one Resident (#75), out of a total sample of 40 residents, that he/she was provided with food items that were on his/her diet slip. Specifically, staff failed to follow the diet slip, resulting in food items not being provided to Resident #75 for three observed meals. Findings include:Resident #75 was admitted to the facility in July 2025 and has diagnoses that include unspecified dementia, anemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, osteoarthritis, and gastro-esophageal reflux. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 3/17/26, indicated Resident #75 scored 8 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam signifying he/she as having moderate cognitive impairment, required setup or clean-up assistance for meals and is on a therapeutic diet. During an observation and interview on 4/13/26 at 9:55 A.M., Resident #75 was sitting up in a wheelchair with his/her breakfast tray in front of him/her. Resident #75 said he/she did not get all the food on his/her breakfast tray and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately document in the medical record for one Resident (#86) out of a total sample of 40 residents. Specifically, for Resident #86 the facility documented that oxygen therapy was administered when it was not. Findings include: Resident #86 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 with diagnoses including essential primary hypertension, chronic kidney disease and dementia. Review of Resident #86's's most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated Resident #86 was cognitively intact as evidence by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of a possible score of 15. On 4/13/26 at 8:15 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #86 in bed, and he/she was not wearing oxygen. The oxygen concentrator, respiratory tubing and equipment were next to the bed. On 4/13/26 at 12:56 P.M., the surveyor observed Resident #86 sitting in the dining room eating lunch. Resident #86 was not wearing a nasal canula and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-17 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), whose Advanced Directives and Physician's Order indicated his/her elected code status was Do Not Resuscitate (DNR, medical order written by a physician, which instructs healthcare providers not to do cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest) the Facility failed to ensure nursing staff honored his/her right to self-determination, when after being found unresponsive and without a pulse, nursing staff initiated life saving measures.Findings include:The Facility Policy, titled, Resident Rights, dated [DATE], indicated all residents were afforded their right to a dignified existence, self-determination, respect, and full recognition of their individuality.The Facility Policy, titled, Advanced Directive and Care Planning Policy, dated [DATE], indicated:-Upon admission, the Facility would identify if the resident had an advanced directive and the resident's choices would be incorporated into…
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 before2026-02-17 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), whose Advanced Directives indicated he/she was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR, medical order written by a physician, it instructs healthcare providers not to do cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest), the Facility failed to ensure services provided by nursing met professional standards of quality, when nursing initiated life saving measures including performing Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation on a resident who was a DNR.Findings include:Standard Reference: Standard of Practice Reference: Pursuant to Massachusetts General Law (M.G.L), chapter 112, individuals are given the designation of registered nurse and practical nurse which includes the responsibility to provide nursing care. Pursuant to the Code of Massachusetts Regulation (CMR) 244, Rules and Regulations 3.02 and 3.04 define the responsibilities and functions of a registered nurse and practical nurse respectively. The regulations…
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 · D2026-01-13 · 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 four sampled residents (Resident #3), who was moderately cognitively impaired and dependent on staff to meet his/her care needs, the facility failed to ensure he/she was treated in a dignified and respectful manner when Hospice Aide #1 was witnessed by staff on more than one occasion respond to Resident #1's adverse behavior by insulting and calling him/her names, and did so in a demeaning manner.Findings include:Review of Facility Policy titled Resident Rights, dated 04/23/23, indicated the facility will protect and promote the rights of the resident and afford each resident his or her basic right to be treated with dignity and respect. The Policy indicated the facility will ensure that all residents are afforded the right to a dignified existence, self determination, respect full recognition of their individuality, consideration and privacy in treatment and care for personal needs. The Policy indicated that all personnel are required to protect and promote the rights of each resident, as well as encourage and assist each…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-13 · 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 two of four sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #3), the facility failed to ensure staff consistently implemented and followed their abuse policy related to protecting residents and reporting abuse allegations, when 1) on 12/19/25 Resident #1 reported to Nurse #1 that he/she had been slapped in the face, and 2) despite multiple staff member witness Hospice Aide #1 allegedly verbally abuse Resident #3, neither of these incidents were immediately reported to a Supervisor or Administrative staff, as required. Findings included: Review of Facility Policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated 05/28/25, indicated the home will report all alleged violations to the Administrator, Medical Director, state agency, adult protective services and to all other required agencies immediately, but no later than two hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse. The Policy indicated it would achieve in providing staff information on how and to whom they may report concerns and incidents without fear…
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 · D2026-01-13 · 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 #3) the facility failed to ensure that staff immediately reported incidents of alleged verbal abuse to administration staff as required, so they could report timely to the necessary state agencies.Findings include:Review of Facility Policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated 05/28/25, indicated the home will report all alleged violations to the Administrator, Medical Director, state agency, adult protective services and to all other required agencies immediately, but no later than two hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse. Review of Resident #3's clinical record indicated his/her diagnoses included Traumatic Brain Injury, Morbid Obesity, and Major Depressive Disorder.During an interview on 01/13/26 at 11:45 A.M., Resident #3 said one day around 10:00 A.M. (exact date unknown), a Hospice Aide (identified as Hospice Aide #1) called him/her a pig and said she'd take him/her to the slaughterhouse to get him/her slaughtered. Resident #3 said…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on records reviewed and interviews for two of three sampled residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2), who were at risk for developing Diabetes-related foot complications, the Facility failed to ensure they received proper care and treatment to maintain good foot health.Findings include:Review of the Facility's policy, titled Diabetic Foot Care, dated 04/2016, indicated the following:Policy: It is the policy of the facility to provide appropriate foot care to all diabetic residents/patients.Procedure:-wash bilateral feet with warm soapy water-rinse with clean water-dry feet thoroughly-apply house lotion-record the treatment and chart all pertinent observations1) Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in June 2021, diagnoses included Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with diabetic neuropathy and dementia.Review of Resident #1's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the month of November 2025, indicated he/she had an order to be administered Diabetic foot care every evening and for nursing to document all abnormal findings and interventions in a progress note.Further review 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 · Ecited before2025-04-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and that medication carts were kept clean and tidy in four out of six medication carts reviewed. Specifically, 1. The facility failed to store medications as indicated in the refrigerator. 2. The facility failed to store treatment supplies separate from oral and other medications. 3. The facility failed to maintain clean medication carts without spills. 4. The facility failed to ensure that medication stored in the medication carts were labeled with resident identifiers. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Medication Storage in the Facility, dated as effective February 2019, indicated the following: -Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. -A. The provider pharmacy dispenses medications in containers that…
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 · E2025-04-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that food was dated in the main kitchen and on three of five unit kitchenettes, that produce showing significant signs of decomposition was discarded, that food was not stored on or below potential sources of environmental contamination, that food was not stored directly on the floor and that the facility process for dented cans was followed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Food in Refrigerator, revised July 2023, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: - Food being returned to storage after cooking or preparation must be covered tightly, labeled and dated. - Food items that remain sealed from the supplier may be held until the expiration date if unopened. Review of the facility's policy titled Food brought in by Family or Visitors - Use and Storage, revised October 2010, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: - It is the right of the residents of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-11 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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, observation and interview the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#259) out of a total sample of 35 residents did not self-administer medication without an assessment or physician's order. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Self-Administration of Medications, dated February 2019, indicated residents are permitted to self-administered medications if the facility's interdisciplinary team has determined that the practice would be safe for the resident and other residents of the facility and there is a prescriber's order to self-administer. Resident #259 was admitted to the facility in April 2025 and has diagnoses which include diabetes and depression. Review of Resident #259's Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated a score of 15, signifying intact cognition. Review of Resident #259's clinical record indicated there was no assessment for the self-administration of medications. Review of Resident #259's physician orders dated April 2025 indicated there was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-11 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure it developed a baseline care plan for skin breakdown within 48 hours of admission for one Resident(#181) out of a total sample of 35 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Wound and Skin Care - Pressure Injury Prevention and Management, dated 5/16/24 indicated: - After completing a thorough assessment/evaluation, the interdisciplinary team shall develop a relevant care plan that includes measurable goals for prevention and management of pressure injuries with appropriate interventions. Resident #181 was admitted to the facility in March 2025, and has diagnoses which include right hip fracture, severe dementia, depression, muscle weakness and abnormalities of mobility. Review of Resident #181's admission assessment, dated 3/15/25 indicated that he/she had a dressing on the right hip, bruising to bilateral antecubital and redness under both breasts. The assessment indicated Resident #181 triggered for the development…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident-centered personalized care plan was developed and/or implemented for three Residents (#95, #89 and #8) out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #95, the facility failed to develop a Hemodialysis (a medical treatment used for patients with advanced kidney failure It involves a machine that filters wastes and fluids form the body when the kidneys can no longer perform this function adequately) care plan. 2. For Resident #89, who has hearing and vision deficits, the facility failed to develop hearing and vision care plans. 3. For Resident #8, the facility failed to implement his/her right Prevalon boot (pressure relieving boot) per his/her physician's order. Finding Include: Review of the facility policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans, dated, 2/28/24, indicated the following: -It is the policy of this home to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-11 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided according to accepted standards of clinical practice for one Resident (#118) out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #118's diet was changed as recommended, following a choking incident, that resulted in a hospitalization to have food extricated from his/her esophagus. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Verbal Orders, dated 3/27/24, indicated the following: -Physician orders may be received by telephone, by a licensed nurse or other licensed or registered health care specialist who is legally authorized to do so. 1. Repeat any prescribed orders back to the physician or health care provider. 2. Use clarification questions to avoid misunderstandings. Resident #118 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses including food in the esophagus causing other injury and esophageal obstruction. Review of the most recent 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 · D2025-04-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure nursing staff provided assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) for one dependent Residents (#43) out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, for Resident #43 the facility failed to provide assistance with the removal of unwanted facial hair. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL's), undated, indicated the following: -The facility will, based on the resident's comprehensive assessment and consistent with the resident's needs and choices, ensure a resident's abilities in ADL's do not deteriorate unless deterioration is unavoidable. -Care and services will be provided for the following activities of daily living: Bathing, dressing, grooming and oral care. -A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. Resident #43 was admitted to the facility in November 2024, with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease with dyskinesia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-11 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review and observation, the facility failed to provide the prescribed therapeutic diet to one Resident (#16), out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #16 with a ground textured diet as prescribed by the physician. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Therapeutic diets, revised July 2023, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: - The attending physician will prescribe a therapeutic diet. - A tray identification system is established to ensure that each patient/resident receives his or her diet as ordered. - The dietitian records in the patients/residents medical record significant information relating to the patients/residents response to his or her therapeutic diet. - Mechanically altered diets will be considered therapeutic diets. Resident #16 was admitted to the facility in May 2022 with a diagnosis of macular degeneration. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/23/25,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for three Residents (#8, #40 and #95), out of a total sample of 35 residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #8, the nurses documented in the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) the Resident was wearing his/her right lower extremity Prevalon boot (pressure relieving boot) when he/she was not. 2. For Residents #40 and #95 the facility failed to accurately document the location of blood pressure (BP) readings. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Documentation in the Medical Record, dated 11/29/23 indicated the following: Policy: - Each resident's medical record shall contain an accurate representation of the actual experiences of the resident and include enough information to provide a picture of the resident's progress through accurate and timely documentation. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: -Documentation should be factual, objective and resident centered. -Documentation should be accurate, relevant, and contain sufficient details about…
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 before2024-08-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for two of three sampled residents, (Resident #1 and Resident #2) the Facility failed to ensure they maintained complete and accurate medical records, when 1) a signed informed written consent was not obtained for Resident #1 related to the administration of psychotropic medications, as required and 2) nursing documentation for Resident #2 related to the conduction of weekly skin assessments was incomplete, and assessments missing. Findings include: The Facility policy, titled Documentation in the Medical Record, dated 11/29/23, indicated each resident's medical record would contain an accurate representation of the actual experiences of the resident and include enough information to provide a picture of the resident's progress through accurate and timely documentation. 1) Review of the Circular Letter 17-2-699 issued by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, dated 02/01/17, indicated that in order to meet M.G.L Section 72 BB of Chapter 111 requirements for documenting informed consent, the Facility must have completed 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 · Ecited before2024-05-31 · 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, interviews and policy review the facility failed to ensure staff stored medications and biologicals in accordance with State and Federal laws. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure medications with shortened expiration dates were dated once opened in 5 of 6 medication carts observed, and 2.) Ensure medication carts were locked when unattended. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled 'Medication Storage in the Facility', dated 2/2019, indicated the following but not limited to: - Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. - The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medication. - When the original seal of a manufacturer's container or vial is initially broken, the container or vial will be dated. - The nurse shall place a date opened sticker on the medication and enter 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 · Ecited before2024-05-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to implement practices for the prevention of potential infection on 1 out of 5 resident units. Specifically: 1.) Nursing staff failed to properly disinfect equipment used for multiple residents during the medication pass. 2.) Nursing staff failed to appropriately perform hand hygiene after doffing contaminated gloves. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Glucose, Blood-Monitoring', revised January 2014, indicated the following: - Wipe down glucometer with bleach wipes after each use. Review of the facility policy titled 'Determining Precaution Type Policy', dated 4/26/24, indicated the following: - Resident-Care Equipment: If use of common items is unavoidable, then adequately clean and disinfect them before use for another resident. Review of the facility policy titled 'Infection Prevention and Control Plan Oversight', dated 2024, indicated the following: - Implementation of appropriate infection prevention and control measures. - Staff competency of infection prevention and control processes including…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the physician of the unavailability of a treatment supply for daily wound care for one Resident (#9), in a total sample of 36 residents. Specifically, for Resident #9, nursing failed to notify the physician when his/her physician's ordered flagyl (medication used for wound odor) was unavailable for two days and the santyl (medicated ointment for wounds) was unavailable for four days. Findings include: Review of policy titled 'Resident/Patient Change in Condition', dated as reviewed March 2024, indicated: - The physician/nurse practitioner, resident/patient and/or legal representative will be promptly notified by the licensed nurse of the need to alter or discontinue treatment due to adverse consequences or to commence a new form of treatment. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility in May 2017 with diagnoses including dementia with behaviors, depression, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of Resident #9's most recent 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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of potential sexual abuse for one Resident (#121) out of a total sample of 36 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Prevention, Identification, Investigation and Reporting of Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment or Exploitation of a Resident or Misappropriation of Resident Property', dated 4/2023, indicated the following: - The facility will monitor and assess specific events, occurrences, patterns and trends that may constitute abuse, neglect, mistreatment or exploitation of a resident or the misappropriation of resident property. All Nursing Home Staff must immediately report to his/her supervisor any suspected abuse, neglect, mistreatment, or exploitation of a resident. - Sexual abuse is the non-consensual contact of any type with a resident that includes, but is not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual coercion, or sexual assault. - Investigation: the facility will investigate all allegations and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for three Residents (#109, #117, and #43), out of a total sample of 36 residents. Specifically: 1.) For Resident #109, the facility failed to ensure nursing changed an indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag as ordered by the physician. 2.) For Resident #117, the facility failed to ensure nursing implemented a physician's ordered wander guard. 3.) For Resident #43, the facility failed to provided nursing services or care that adhere to accepted standards of quality regarding administration of injectable medications. Findings include: 1.) Review of the facility policy titled 'Indwelling Urinary Catheter, Insertion, Care, Removal', dated April 2023, indicated the intent of the policy is to not only give guidance for urinary catheter maintenance techniques, but also to assist in the prevention of catheter associated urinary tract infections. C. Maintenance. 6. Urinary drainage bags…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, records reviewed and interviews, the facility failed provide necessary services to ensure one Resident (#36) out of a total sample of 36 Residents, was able to effectively communicate his/her needs. Findings include: Resident #36 was admitted to the facility in January 2023 with diagnoses including dementia, anxiety and neurocognitive disorder. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated that Resident #36 was severely cognitively impaired and was unable to complete a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score. Review of the MDS indicated Resident #36 had moderate difficulty using a hearing aid and he/she could sometimes make self understood and he/she can sometimes understand others. Review of Resident #36's active physician's orders, indicated: - Bilateral hearing aids - ensure placement in the morning and remove at bedtime. Every day and evening shift, dated 1/31/23. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide care and maintenance of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#95), out of a total sample of 36 residents. Specifically, for Resident #95, the facility failed to ensure nursing completed a PICC line dressing change as ordered by the physician. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled 'Central Line Dressing Change', dated June 2016, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: - The transparent dressing will be used over the insertion site and it will be changed every 7 days or immediately if the dressing is loose or soiled. - If there is drainage or bleeding from insertion site, sterile gauze with transparent dressing will be used. - Needles connectors will be attached to every lumen of the catheter and will be changed every 7 days, after lab draws or as needed. - During dressing change observe the site for signs and symptoms 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 before2024-05-31 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a therapeutic diet as ordered for two Resident's (#179 and #142) out of a total sample of 36 residents. Findings include: 1.) Resident #179 was admitted in July 2023 with diagnoses including dementia and Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movements). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated that Resident #179 was severely impaired cognitively as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 out of 15. Review of MDS indicated that Resident #179 requires supervision or touching assistance with meals. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #179 indicated the following: - Diet: House, thin liquids, ground texture large portions. (Initiated 7/2023). Review of the nutritional care plan indicated the following: - Super cereal with breakfast. (Initiated 11/2023). - Super mashed potato with lunch meals. (Initiated 10/2023). Review of the dietary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the correct adaptive equipment for one Resident (#179) out of a total sample of 36 residents. Findings include: Resident #179 was admitted in July 2023 with diagnoses including dementia and Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia (involuntary muscle movements). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated that Resident #179 is severely cognitively impaired as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 out of 15. Review of the MDS indicated that Resident #179 requires supervision or touching assistance with meals. Review of Resident #179's active physician's orders, dated 1/5/24, indicated that Resident #179 requires a nosey cup (an adaptive drinking cup with a U-shape carved into the lid of one side) at meals. Review of the nutritional care plan indicated the following: - Lip plate and nosey cup with meals, dated 10/13/23. Review of Resident #179's diet slip, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALTENWEG, MARK | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/07/2007 |
| FERRICK, MICHAEL | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/08/2017 |
| HARDEN, DIANE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 08/25/2006 |
| PRENDERGAST, NAOMI | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/26/2004 |
| D'YOUVILLE LEADERSHIP SOLUTIONS, INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2012 |
| ARCHAMBAULT, JEANNE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/18/2011 |
| BRESNICK, LOUIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/08/2017 |
| BROWN, THOMAS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/22/2010 |
| CLERMONT, JOASEPH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2014 |
| COCHRAN, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/22/2010 |
| FRECHETTE, GERARD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/28/2013 |
| GORI, PETER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/23/2014 |
| HOEY, AMY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/29/2012 |
| HOWARD, CAROL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/23/2014 |
| KNIGHT, MARGARET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/25/2015 |
| LAROCHELLE, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/23/2014 |
| LEBLANC, PAULINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/28/2013 |
| LINNEHAN, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/01/2008 |
| MALO, PRESCILLE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/07/2007 |
| MARTIN, WILLIAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/25/2015 |
| RAMIREZ, JUDITH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/28/2013 |
| SUTCLIFFE, ARTHUR | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/28/2013 |
| YOUNG, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/25/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 23 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.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $194K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225515. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-15, 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.