No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Berkshire Place

290 South Street, Pittsfield, MA 01201 · Non profit - Corporation · 54 certified beds · (413) 445-4056 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (413) 445-4056 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)2 actual-harm citations
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • nursing-staff turnover (68%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
195 South St · (413) 443-6116 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Rite Aid0.3 mi
163 South St · (413) 445-5030 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
202 West St · (413) 445-8829 · Call to confirm hours
Park
295 South St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.7%16.4%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.4%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.1%0.8%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.8%15.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.6%3.4%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened9.9%15.4%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication11.9%19.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine85.0%94.8%95.3%worse
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.9%4.2%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.1%21.2%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.9%21.4%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.7%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine78.0%77.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission31.1%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit20.0%11.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.431.881.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.831.501.80better

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.

64.8% 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 179 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

64.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
70.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.33U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 70.9% 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 134 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 55% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF64.8%CMS range 59.8–69.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.3%CMS range 8.6–16.710.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge70.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge45.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge63.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified96.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.6%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.6%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.7%CMS range 3.8–12.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.681.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.63
RN hours/ resident / day
1.39
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.99
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.02
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.20
RN hoursweekends
68.4%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 54 beds and averages 50.5 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 4 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 5.02 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.99 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 4.54 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.21 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-12)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-28)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · G2023-08-17 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews for one resident (Resident #199) out of a total sample of 12 residents, the facility failed to notify the Attending Physician of a significant change in the Resident's medical status. Specifically, for Resident #199 the facility staff failed to contact the Physician when the Resident began to first exhibit signs and symptoms of a significant decline, resulting in a delayed transfer to the hospital. The Resident was diagnosed with sepsis and admitted to the Critical Care Unit when finally transferred to the hospital. Findings include: Resident #199 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with the following diagnoses: surgical aftercare following surgery of the nervous system, and history of urinary retention (a condition where a person is unable to fully empty the contents of the bladder that may lead to other health problems such as Urinary Tract Infection [UTI] and kidney failure). Review of the facility's policy titled Physician Notification, reviewed 8/15/22, included but was not limited to: -Upon the identification of a resident who has…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2023-08-17 · 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 record review and interviews for one Resident (#199) out of a total sample of 12 residents, the facility failed to ensure standards of quality of care were provided to the Resident. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Recognize a significant decline in the Resident's status and notify the Attending Physician timely resulting in delay in transferring the critically ill Resident to the hospital. 2. Appropriately document and monitor areas of concern on the Resident's skin which was ultimately diagnosed as a pressure injury (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical or other device). Findings include: Resident #199 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with the following diagnoses: encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the nervous system (tumor removal from the spinal cord), history of urinary retention (the inability to fully empty the contents of the bladder) with a Foley catheter (a thin flexible tube…

    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 · D2026-02-12 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Influenza and/or Pneumococcal vaccines were administered when consent was obtained to receive the vaccine for two Residents (#2 and #29), of five applicable residents reviewed for immunizations, out of a total sample of 13 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: For Resident #2, administer the Influenza Vaccine when consent was obtained for the Resident to receive the vaccine in January 2026. For Resident #29, administer the Pneumococcal Vaccine when consent was obtained to receive the vaccine in June 2024. Findings include:1. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility in January 2026 with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease (CKD) Stage 3, and Cerebral Infarction, and was over the age of 65. Review of the facility policy titled Influenza Immunization, reviewed in January 2026, indicated the following: -Residents/patients will be offered immunization against influenza as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and under guidance by the Massachusetts Department of Public…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0887 — isolated
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that COVID-19 immunization was administered after consent was obtained to administer the vaccine for one Resident (#4), of five applicable residents reviewed for immunizations, out of a total sample of 13 residents. Specifically, for Resident #4, the facility failed to administer the COVID-19 immunization when the Resident was eligible to receive the vaccine and written consent for the vaccine was obtained in October 2025. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident/Patient COVID-19 Immunization, dated October 2021, included the following: -Residents/patients will be offered immunization against COVID-19 as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and under guidance by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MA DPH). -The COVID-19 vaccine will be offered unless immunization is medically contraindicated or the resident/patient has already been immunized. -If the COVID-19 immunization requires multiple doses, the resident/patient and/or resident representative,…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-28 · 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of care were maintained for diabetic management of one Resident (#23) out of a total sample of 13 residents. Specifically, for Resident #23, the facility failed to ensure that the Medical Doctor (MD) was notified and appropriate assessment conducted when the Resident experienced a period of hyperglycemia (high blood sugar). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Diabetes Mellitus (DM- disease in which the body's ability to produce or respond to the hormone insulin [a hormone that helps the body regulate blood sugar] is impaired resulting in variable blood glucose [sugar] levels in the blood), Guidelines For (Nursing Care of Resident With), revised 5/06, indicated the following: -Quickly restore normal cerebral function and prevent hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia. -Recognize, treat or prevent complications commonly associated with diabetes. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility in August 2022, with diagnoses including Type II DM (non-insulin dependent type of diabetes…

    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 · D2024-10-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication (medication that affect the mind, emotions, and behavior) was limited to 14 days for one Resident (#24), of five applicable residents reviewed, out of a total sample of 13 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that PRN Ativan (Lorazepam: anti-anxiety medication) was limited to 14 days and if not limited, included a Physician determined duration for continued use of the medication. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Psychotropic Medications, dated 8/31/23, indicated the following: -PRN psychotropic medications which are not antipsychotic medications are limited to 14 days. -The Attending Physician/Prescriber may extend the order beyond 14 days if he or she feels it is appropriate. -If the Attending Physician extends the PRN order, the medical record will include documented rationale and determined duration. Resident #24 was admitted to the facility in September 2024, with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder (mental health…

    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 · D2024-10-28 · tag F0773 — isolated
    Provide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain Physician orders prior to administering a Pneumococcal Vaccination to one Resident (#23) out of five applicable residents reviewed, out of a total sample of 13 residents. Specifically, for Residents #23 the facility failed to obtain a Physician's order prior to administering the Pneumococcal 20-Valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV20-type of Pneumococcal Vaccination). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident/Patient Pneumococcal Immunization, reviewed 7/15/22, indicated the following: -A Licensed Nurse will administer the Pneumococcal Vaccine with a standing order from the Medical Director per manufacturer's guidelines for residents/patients. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility in August 2022. Review of Resident #23's immunization record indicated he/she was administered the PCV20 on 5/24/23, while he/she was a Resident in the facility. Further review of the Resident's medical record indicated no documentation a Physician's order was in place prior to or at the time the PCV20 was administered…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-17 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and records reviewed for one resident (Resident #27) out of a total sample of 12 residents, the facility failed to complete a significant change of status (SCOS) Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment within the required 14 days. Findings include: Resident #27 was admitted to the facility in May 2023. Review of the Resident's Medical Record indicated the Resident signed onto Hospice Services on 7/31/23. On 8/16/23 at 9:13 A.M., the surveyor reviewed the SCOS MDS Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 8/9/23 and noted that it was marked in progress. On 8/16/23 at 12:28 P.M., the surveyor and the MDS Nurse reviewed the Resident's SCOS MDS Assessment with an ARD date of 8/9/23. The MDS Nurse said the date the Resident signed onto Hospice Services started the count down for when the SCOS MDS Assessment should have been completed, and the SCOS MDS Assessment should have been completed within 14 calendar days after 7/31/23, the date the Resident signed onto Hospice Services, and it was not, as required.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-17 · 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 for one Resident (#199) out of a total sample of 12 residents, the facility failed to implement the plan of care. Specifically, for Resident #199 the facility staff failed to ensure that lab work ordered by the Physician was obtained, resulting in incomplete diagnostic information available for the Attending Physician to make treatment decisions. Findings include: Resident #199 was admitted to the facility in June 2023. Review of the Physician's History and Physical Exam Form signed and dated by the Physician on 6/23/23, indicated to repeat Lytes (also known as an Electrolyte panel, a blood test that measures levels of the body's Sodium (helps control the amount of fluid in the body and helps nerves and muscles work properly), Chloride (helps control the fluid in the body and helps maintain healthy blood volume and blood pressure), Potassium (helps heart and muscles work properly) and Bicarbonate (helps maintain the body's acid and base balance and plays an important role of moving carbon dioxide through the bloodstream). Review of the Resident's…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    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

    Based on observations, interview and records reviewed for one Resident (#27) out of a total sample of 12 residents, the facility failed to provide care and services for the use of Oxygen. Specifically, for Resident #27 the facility failed to ensure that Physician's orders were in place for the accurate amount of Oxygen being utilized by the Resident, and care and services of the oxygen tubing. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Oxygen, reviewed 7/15/22, indicated the following: -Obtain specific physician order for oxygen therapy. -Change oxygen tubing weekly. Date and initial on tape when changed and apply to tubing. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 with the following diagnoses: Pneumonia (an infection that affects the lungs) and Respiratory Failure (when the lungs are unable to get adequate oxygen to the blood/ body and get rid of carbon dioxide from the body) condition that makes it difficult to breathe on your own). On 8/15/23 at 4:58 P.M., the surveyor observed Resident #27 resting in bed. He/she was receiving Oxygen via nasal cannula (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 · D2023-08-17 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews for one Resident (#199) out of a total sample of 12 residents, the facility failed to maintain accurate medical records. Specifically, for Resident #199 the facility failed to: 1. Ensure that staff accurately documented Nursing Progress Notes pertaining to the status of the Resident's Foley catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine outside the body). 2. Ensure that staff accurately documented the findings of the Resident's skin condition on a Weekly Skin Assessment and Nursing Progress note. Findings include: Resident #199 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with a Foley catheter. 1. Review of the June 2023 Physician's orders indicated an order to discontinue the Resident's Foley catheter on 6/30/23. Review of a Nursing Progress Note dated 6/30/23 indicated the following: Resident's Foley catheter was removed early this morning. Review of a Nursing Progress Note dated 7/7/23 indicated the following: Resident's Foley patent (not clogged)…

    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
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BERKSHIRE RETIREMENT HOME INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/25/1986
FORFA, EDWARDIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/1986
FURLANO, NELSONIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2013
GILLIGAN, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/18/2018
GUYETTE, SHELLEYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2012
HERRICK, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/24/2007
KAHN, CRAIGIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/24/2021
KIRBY, ELIZABETHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/09/2006
MARA, DOROTHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/09/2006
MARINARO, VINCENTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/20/2011
MCKENNA, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/12/2024
MCNINCH, JACQUELINEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/24/2021
MURPHY, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$7.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+9.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 13%Other / private 87%

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$387per resident / day
operating cost
$11,754per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$427per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page for homes that do.

Typical monthly cost in Massachusetts
$14,448/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$15,817/mo
Nursing home (private)
$9,600/mo
Assisted living

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 225762. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-12, 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.

What to do next