Continuing Care At Brooksby Village

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.

64.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 362 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 68.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 131 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 60% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 104 beds and averages 57.3 residents a day — about 55% occupied, or roughly 47 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.02 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.54 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.71 is at or above 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 4.57 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.21 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.79 to 0.93 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% 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 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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · H2024-12-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  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 record review, the facility failed to ensure its staff provided treatments in accordance with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#12) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, for Resident #12: 1. The facility failed to ensure a wound clinic appointment was re-scheduled to obtain new wound treatment interventions when requested by the Nurse Practitioner for a deteriorating right lower extremity wound, resulting in the wound continuing to deteriorate. 2. The facility failed to implement the physician's order to apply z-guard (a protective moisture barrier ointment) before soaking the right lower extremity wound in dakin's solution (a solution containing diluted bleach used topically in wound to reduce the risk of infection), resulting in pain and deterioration of the wound. 3. The facility failed to ensure the right lower extremity wound was assessed and measured weekly, as indicated in the Resident's plan of care, resulting in the facility 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two Residents (#48, #5) were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications by ensuring a reassessment of an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication after 14 days, out of a total sample of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Psychoactive Medications, dated as revised 4/25, indicated the following: -Residents on PRN (as needed) psychoactive medications will be evaluated by a physician before extending use past 14 days. 1. Resident #48 was admitted to the facility in June 2024 with diagnoses that included hypertensive chronic kidney disease, retention of urine, adult failure to thrive, and chronic pain. Review of Resident #48's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/23/25, indicated he/she scored a 14 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating intact cognition. Review of Resident #48's discontinued order with a start date of 9/25/25 and discontinued date of 12/22/25, indicated give Ativan (a benzodiazepine medication) 0.5 mg (milligrams) 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · 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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to implement the plan of care for one Resident (#9) out of a total sample of 19 residents. Specifically, for Resident #9 the facility failed to place foam booties and hand rolls as ordered.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Care/Service Plans, dated 5/21, failed to indicate that the plan of care is to be followed by staff. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility in August 2025 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, dementia and depression. Review of the physician's orders dated January 2026 indicated an order for foam boots to bilateral feet when in bed. Further review indicated the following order: Following A.M., care, place carrot to right hand as tolerated. During P.M. care, remove carrot to right hand and place hand rolls in both hands. Review of the care plan titled Skin Integrity, indicated to apply heel protectors to both feet when in bed. Further review indicated to place hand rolls in bilateral hands as ordered. On 1/20/26 at 8:25 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #9 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two Residents (#68, #7) out of a total sample of 19 Residents. Specifically,For Resident #68, the facility failed to accurately reconcile medication orders on admission to the facility. 2. For Resident #7, the facility failed to change a dressing as ordered.Findings include: 1. Resident #68 was admitted to the facility in January 2025 with diagnoses that included hyperlipidemia, weakness and cognitive communication deficits. There is no Minimum Data Set completed at this time for Resident #68. Review of admission paperwork from the referring hospital, dated 1/13/26, indicated in part, the following: Start taking these medications: Rosuvastatin (Crestor, a statin medication used to lower bad cholesterol (LDL) and triglycerides while increasing good cholesterol (HDL), and it is commonly prescribed to prevent cardiovascular diseases) 20 mg (milligrams) by mouth at bedtime. -Key information for Outpatient Providers: Recommend…

  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 · D2026-01-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice for Foley catheter care for one Resident (#48) out of a total sample of 19 residents. Specifically for Resident #48, the facility failed to ensure they obtained physician's orders for the correct indwelling catheter size.Findings include:Resident #48 was admitted to the facility in June of 2024 with diagnoses that included hypertensive chronic kidney disease, retention of urine, adult failure to thrive, and chronic pain. Review of Resident #48's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/23/25, indicated he/she scored a 14 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating intact cognition. Further review of the MDS indicated he/she had an indwelling catheter. On 1/20/25 at 7:57 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #48 in bed with a foley catheter. Review of Resident #48's physician order dated 1/10/26, indicated Catheter: Change foley bag every 1 month. Notes: change foley catheter every month. Review of Resident #48's nursing progress…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately document in the medical record for two Residents (#7 and #9) out of a total sample of 19 residents. Specifically:For Resident #7 the facility documented that a treatment was completed when it was not.For Resident #9 the facility documented that foam booties and hand rolls were in place as ordered when they were not.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Documentation, dated 5/21, indicated that a medical record is maintained on each resident to provide a permanent, accurate and legible record of the care given. Further review indicated that only facts are to be documented. 1. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility in March 2025 with diagnoses including dementia, depression and malnutrition. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 12/12/25, indicated that Resident #7 had severe cognitive impairment, scoring a 5 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam. Further review indicated that Resident #7 is totally dependent on staff for all activities of daily living.…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who had severe cognitive impairment, the Facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was free from the use of physical restraint when, on 05/24/25 around 6:15 A.M. Certified Nurse Aide #1 wrapped Resident #1's body from under the chest area to below the buttocks in a bed sheet to prevent him/her from accessing that area of his/her body. Findings include: Review of the Facility's Abuse Prevention Policy, dated December 2016, indicated a commitment to provide an environment where residents remain free from abuse. The Policy indicated physical abuse included misuse of physical restraints. The Policy indicated misuse of restraints as having physical control of a resident beyond the medical provider's orders or not in accordance with the plan of care and acceptable medical standards. The Policy indicated the misuse of restraints includes use of material attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the resident cannot remove easily that restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-07 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who on 12/12/24 was noted by nursing to have a bruised area on his/her right arm, and reported to nursing that a staff member had been physically abusive with him/her during care, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented and followed their abuse policy, when although Nurse #1 immediately reported Resident #1's allegation to the Nurse Supervisor, the Nurse Supervisor did not immediately report the abuse allegation to the Director of Nursing, as required. Findings include: Review of the Facility Policy titled Abuse Policy and Procedure, with a revision date of 2021, indicated the Facility is committed to providing an environment where residents' rights are protected and residents remain free from abuse, neglect, exploitation, and mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source or misappropriation of property. -Further review of the policy indicated allegations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, and mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source or misappropriation of resident…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-12-23 · tag F0944 — widespread
  Conduct mandatory training, for all staff, on the facility’s Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on review of the Facility Assessment, employee education record review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement mandatory training on Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) for 15 employees. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment, dated 11/1/24, failed to indicate mandatory QAPI training. Review of 15 employee education files for 5 certified nurse assistants (CNAs) and 10 licensed nurses indicated: - 0 out of 15 direct care employees had documentation they had completed QAPI training during their employment. During an interview on 12/23/24 at 9:03 A.M., the Administrator said the facility does not provide any QAPI training to employees.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-12-23 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide a dignified experience for Residents on one of two units. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that staff did not speak a foreign language while in the presence of, and while providing care for, Residents on the Terrace unit. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled Resident Rights - Continuing Care, dated June 2023, indicated the following: - Residents have the right to be treated with respect and dignity. During the Resident group meeting on 12/19/24 at 1:30 P.M., three out of three primarily English-speaking Residents said that staff have spoken in a foreign language to each other in front of them. On 12/18/24 at 4:46 P.M., the surveyor observed two staff members speaking a foreign language to each other within a primarily English-speaking Resident in the common area of the Terrace unit. On 12/18/24 at 5:18 P.M., the surveyor observed two staff members speaking a foreign language to each other while one of the staff members was providing feeding assistance to a Resident 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-12-23 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — pattern
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for four Residents (#30, #52, #1, and #12) out of a total of 18 sampled residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #30 the facility failed to ensure that the Resident's air mattress was set to the correct setting to promote wound healing. 2. For Resident #52, the facility failed to ensure a stage 2 coccyx pressure ulcer was assessed and measured weekly, as indicated in the Resident's plan of care and failed to have a physician's order for an air mattress. 3. For Resident #1, the facility failed to ensure a Stage 2 pressure injury to the left buttock was assessed and measured weekly, as indicated in the Resident's plan of care. 4. For Resident #12, the facility failed to ensure a left heel pressure related deep tissue injury (DTI) 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

Fines & penalties

$167,099 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $167,099 — penalty dated 2024-12-23

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ERICKSON SENIOR LIVING — 17 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 46 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $10.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

What families pay in MA