Nevins Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

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

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.

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.

54.0% 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 247 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 33.3% 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 138 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 153 beds and averages 137.8 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.62 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.77 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

31 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 19 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was assessed by nursing as being at high risk for falls, and whose comprehensive plan of care indicated he/she required the use of monitoring devices (bed and chair alarms) to alert staff when he/she attempted to stand or transfer alone, the Facility failed to ensure staff consistently implemented and followed interventions identified in his/her plan of care, when on 05/22/24, Nurse #1 left Resident #1 alone, without an alarm in place, seated on the commode in his/her room, Resident #1 fell, later complained of pain, was transferred to the Hospital Emergency Department and was diagnosed with a fractured right hip which required surgical intervention to repair. Findings include: The Facility's Policy, titled Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plans, dated as revised 03/2022, indicated that a comprehensive, person-centered care plan to meet the resident's needs would be developed and implemented. 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-06-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was assessed by nursing as being at high risk for falls, was known to be impulsive and whose fall risk interventions included the use of monitoring devices (bed and chair alarms) to alert staff when he/she rose from a sitting or lying position, the Facility failed to ensure he/she was provided with the necessary level of staff supervision to maintain his/her safety, when on 05/22/24, after disabling his/her alarm, Nurse #1 left Resident #1 unattended on the commode, Resident #1 fell to the floor, complained of pain, and was transferred to the Hospital Emergency Department where he/she was diagnosed with a fractured right hip, which required surgical intervention to repair Findings include: The Facility's Policy, titled Falls Prevention and Management Program, dated 09/2018, indicated residents would be assessed for risk for falls and interventions would be implemented as appropriate. The Facility's Policy, titled…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  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 three Residents, (#2, #136 and #66) out of a sample of 34 Residents. Specifically,1.For Resident #2, the facility failed to provide oxygen to the Resident as indicated in the physician's orders.2.For Resident #136, the facility failed to ensure oxygen equipment and tubing was labeled, when changed/dated and that respiratory assessments were documented as indicated in the physician's orders. 3. For Resident #66, the facility failed to ensure nebulizer equipment and tubing was labeled, when changed/dated. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Policy and Procedure: Oxygen (O2) Management' with no revision date, indicated the following: -To ensure the safe and effective administration of oxygen therapy to residents, in compliance with Massachusetts Department of Public Health and CMS guidelines. -It is the policy…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments for three Residents (#16, #66, and #54) out of 34 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to:1.Ensure Resident #16's scheduled Tylenol was not left at the bedside while unsupervised by staff. 2. Ensure Resident #66's Augmentin Oral Tablet (antibiotic medication) was not left at the bedside while unsupervised by staff.3. Ensure Resident #54's Nasal Saline Solution was not left at the bedside while unsupervised by staff.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Storage of Medications, dated as revised in 2024, indicated but was not limited to the following:Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications.Only…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-07 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident meals were at an appropriate temperature and were palatable on 4 of 4 resident units. Findings include: During the initial screening process, multiple residents reported that meals are served cold and not palatable. During the Resident Group Interview held on 1/7/26 at 10:30 A.M., multiple participants reported that meals served to residents on the unit were cold, uncooked and not palatable. During an interview on 1/7/26 at 12:26 P.M., the Food Service Director (FSD) said that the food is brought up to the units on carts with closed cabinet doors and then plated on the units. On 1/7/26 at 12:47 P.M., the surveyor conducted a test tray on the B unit:Mashed Potato: 130 degrees Fahrenheit (F)Steamed Cauliflower: 119 degrees FPuree Meatloaf: 95 degrees F. The food items tasted cold and were not palatable. On 1/7/26 at 12:50 P.M., the surveyor conducted a test tray on the C unit:Meatloaf: 90 degrees F. Mashed Potato: 100 degrees F. Steamed Cauliflower: 90 degrees F. The food items tasted cold and were not…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional food safety standards. Specifically, the facility failed to1. Ensure food items were stored appropriately in the main kitchen reach in and walk in refrigerator and2. Failed to ensure staff maintained proper hand hygiene while serving food on two of four units.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Food Labeling Policy and Procedures for [The Facility], undated, indicated: Policy: All food items must be labeled accurately and clearly to ensure proper identification, traceability, and safe consumptions. Procedures: 1. Labeling Requirements: All food items must be labeled with the following information: Name of the item, date item was brought into facility, use-by or expiration date. Labels must be legible and securely attached to the container or packaging. 1. On 1/6/26 at 7:11 A.M., the surveyor observed the following in the reach-in refrigerator and walk-in refrigerators: -A shopping bag with containers of food. A staff person said that the bag contained…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  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 Advance Directives (written documents that instructs health care providers of the decisions for specific medical treatment if a person was unable to speak or lacked the capacity to make decisions for themselves) were consistently documented in the medical record for one Resident (#66), out of a total sample of 34 residents.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Advanced Directives, dated as revised September 2022, indicated but was not limited to the following:The resident has the right to formulate an advance directive, including the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment. Advance directives are honored in accordance with state law and facility policy.-Information about whether or not the resident has executed an advance directive is displayed prominently in the medical record in a section that is retrievable by any staff.-If the Resident or the resident's representative has executed one or more advance…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview the facility failed to implement the plan of care for one Resident (#4) out of a total sample of 34 residents. Specifically, for Resident #4 the facility failed to obtain and document vital signs as indicated in the plan of care. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, dated as revised March 2022, indicated that a comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident.Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses including presence of a pacemaker, congestive heart failure and atrial fibrillation.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/14/25, indicated that Resident #4 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a score of 9 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam. Further review indicated Resident #4 was dependent on staff for activities of daily living.Review of the care plan…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure assistance with Activities of Daily Living were provided for two Residents (#62 and #129) out of a total sample of 34 Residents. Specifically,For Resident #62 the facility failed to provide supervision or touching assistance with meals as indicated in the Resident's plan of care.For Resident #129 the facility failed to provide continuous supervision with meals as indicated in the Resident's plan of care.Findings include:Review of the untitled policy provided to the surveyor when the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) policy was requested, undated, indicated the following: -Based on the comprehensive assessment of a patient and consistent with the patient's needs and choices, the Center must provide the necessary care and services to ensure that a patient's abilities in activities of daily living do not diminish unless circumstances of the individuals clinical condition demonstrate that such diminution was unavoidable. -The center must ensure that: a patient who is unable to carry out ADLs receives the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and records reviewed, the facility failed to ensure standards of quality of care for one Resident (#36) out of a total sample of 34 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to follow up on a biopsy to Resident #36's nose, failed to identify a change in a skin condition on his/her nose, and failed to document the skin area on a skin assessment. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Skin Management Program Assessment and Prevention of Skin Breakdown, undated, indicated but was not limited to the following:The following measures will be employed as warranted for all residents noted to be at a moderate to high risk for the development of a skin breakdown via the Norton Plus Scale.7.Check the residents skin condition daily and whenever giving care for any signs or symptoms of skin irritation or breakdown.9. Perform and document weekly in the electronic health record the weekly skin check. 10. If a wound is identified the area will be assessed, measured, and…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to consistently provide range of motion (ROM) care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#36) out of a total sample of 34 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented physician's orders for his/her left-hand splint (a device to properly position and protect hand joints) use based on the Occupational Therapist's recommendation and failed to develop a comprehensive resident-centered care plan with individualized interventions for Resident #36 assessed left-hand contracture.Findings include:Resident #36 was admitted to the facility in March 2025 with diagnoses including dysarthria following cerebral infarction, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis affecting left non-dominant side, hypertension and vascular dementia.Review of Resident #36's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the Resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score 14 out of a…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience for one Resident (#140) out of a total sample of 29 residents and on 2 of 4 nursing units. Specifically: 1. For Resident #140 the facility failed to ensure a dignified dining experience in both his/her room and in the unit dining room; and 2. on Units A and C the facility failed to ensure a dignified dining experience when Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) used their phones while feeding residents. Findings include: The facility policy titled Dignity, undated, indicated the following: -Treating residents with dignity and respect maintains and enhances each resident's self worth and improves his or her psychosocial well-being and quality of life. -Through example, education, and monitoring, the social service staff will promote the following types of staff interactions with residents, which maintain their dignity: -Promoting independence and dignity in dining. 1. Resident #140 was admitted to the facility in August 2024 and has diagnoses that include dementia and muscle…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$9,318 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $9,318 — penalty dated 2024-06-18

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

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