Lighthouse Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center
204 Proctor Avenue, Revere, MA 02151 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 123 certified beds · (781) 286-3100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $48,790 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-20)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 improved from 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.4% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.2% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.9% | 0.8% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 55.8% | 15.5% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.7% | 15.4% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.7% | 19.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.5% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.1% | 4.2% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.1% | 21.2% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.5% | 21.4% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.3% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 79.2% | 77.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.9% | 25.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.3% | 11.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.35 | 1.88 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.10 | 1.50 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
58.0% 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 213 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.4% 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 116 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 22% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 33% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 58.0%CMS range 51.0–63.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.8%CMS range 8.7–14.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 66.4% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 55.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 57.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 98.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.7% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.3% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.2%CMS range 4.5–11.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.82 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 123 beds and averages 115.6 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.70 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.12 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 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 3.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.27 to 0.77 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
38 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Resident's environment was free from accident hazards, for one Resident #126, out of a sample of 30 Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to implement a fall care plan intervention which led to Resident #126 falling and sustaining a fracture.Findings include:A review of the facility policy titled 'Falls-Clinical Protocol' with a revision date of September 2012 indicated the following:-The staff will document risk factors for falling in the resident's record and discuss the resident's fall risk. Risk factors for falling include environmental hazards.-The staff will evaluate and document falls that occur while the individual is in the facility, for example when and where they happen, any observations of the events, etc.-For an individual who has fallen, staff will attempt to define possible causes within 24 hours of the fall. Causes refer to factors that are associated with or that directly result in a fall.-Based on the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that services provided met professional standards of practice for one Resident (#31) out of a total sample of 30 Residents. Specifically, for Resident #31 the facility failed to administer medications timely and in accordance with physician's orders.Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Administering Medications, dated as revised April 2019, indicated the following:-Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed.-Medications are administered within one hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified (for example, before and after meal orders). Resident #31 was admitted to the facility in October 2025 with diagnoses that included acute post hemorrhagic anemia and pulmonary embolism.Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/15/26, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Review of physician's orders indicated the following:-Ferrous Sulfate Tablet 325 mg (milligrams) by mouth one…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for two Residents (#11 and #14) out of a total of 30 sampled residents. Specifically,1. For Resident #11 the facility failed to provide assistance to shave unwanted facial hair. 2. For Resident #14 the facility failed to provide assistance to cut fingernails. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting, dated 2001 indicated the following: Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. 1. Resident #11 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses including anxiety disorder, depression and schizophrenia. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 11/14/25, indicated that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent pressure ulcers from developing for one Resident (#40) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #40's heels were elevated off the mattress. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Pressure Ulcers/Skin Breakdown-Clinical Protocol, dated 2001, failed to indicate that staff are to follow the care plan interventions to prevent and heal pressure areas. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses including muscle wasting and atrophy, major depressive disorder and osteoarthritis. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 1/15/26, indicated that Resident #40 scored a 3 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review indicated that Resident #40 is totally dependent for all activities of daily living and at risk for the development of pressure ulcers. Review of the active care plan indicated a focus of risk for skin…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-20 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide care consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#132) with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line (a long, flexible catheter inserted into a vein in the upper arm and threaded into a large central vein near the heart to deliver medications, fluids, or nutrition and to draw blood) out of a total sample of 30 Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to change the PICC line dressing on admission as indicated in the physician's orders or when the PICC line dressing was lifting on the edges. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Central Venous Catheter Care and Dressing Changes, dated as revised October 2024, indicated the following:-A physician's order is needed for this procedure.-Assess central venous access devices with each infusion and at least daily.-Remove any non- transparent dressing and visually inspect the insertion site if any signs or symptoms of complication are present.-Perform site care and dressing change at established intervals or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed provide for one Resident (#79) the necessary respiratory care and services that is in accordance with professional standards of practice and the Resident's care plan out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #79's oxygen was administered according to physician orders.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Administration, dated 2001, indicated that staff are to adjust the oxygen delivery device so that it is comfortable for the resident and the proper flow of oxygen is being administered. Resident #79 was admitted to the facility in December 2022 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease and high blood pressure. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated that Resident #79 is cognitively intact, scoring a 15 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam. Further review indicated that Resident #79 requires…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-02-14 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit direct care staffing data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the entire reporting period, Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter 4 2024 (July 1 - September 30), in accordance with the schedule specified by CMS. Findings include: During an interview on 2/11/25 at 2:58 P.M., with the facility Administrator he said that he started at the facility in November 2024 and was aware that the facility had not submitted the previous quarters staffing data to CMS. The Administrator said that at that time the facility was owned by another company. During an interview on 2/13/25 at 10:49 A.M., with the Regional Administrator she said that the facility was taken over by a new company in October 2024, but could not get the staffing data from the last company so they did not submit it.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-14 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to report allegations of potential abuse (injuries of unknown, and an allegation of neglect) to the State Agency for three Residents (#87, #118, and #55) out of a sample of 30 Residents. 1. For Resident #87, the facility failed to report an X-ray (X-radiation-images created inside of a body by passing beams of radiation through the body) positive for a fracture from an unknown origin to the State Agency within two hours. 2. For Resident #118 the facility failed to notify the state agency of an injury of unknown within 2 hours once the Director of Nursing became of a new fracture (an acute right intertrochanteric [thigh bone] fracture) of unknown origin. 3. For Resident #55 the facility failed to notify the state agency of an allegation of neglect. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled, 'Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation-Reporting and Investigating' with a revision date of September 2022 indicated the following: -All…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-14 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews for three Residents (#22, #376 and #70) out of four residents observed, the facility failed to ensure it was free from a medication error rate of greater than 5%. Three out of four nurses observed made 3 errors out of 33 opportunities resulting in a medication error rate of 9.09%. Specifically, 1.) For Resident #22, Nurse #1 administered the incorrect dose of a medication spray (Fluticasone, medication used for allergies) 2.) For Resident #376, Nurse #4 did not follow manufacture's recommendations and crushed a medication (metoprolol extended-release tablet, cardiac medication that once crushed becomes immediate release) which indicated do not crush. 3.) For Resident #70, Nurse #5 administered the incorrect medication (calcium with vitamin D) that was also expired. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Administering Medications, dated as revised April 2019, indicated that medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. 10. The individual administering the medication checks the label…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with acceptable professional standards of practice. Specifically: 1. Nursing failed to secure the medication carts on 2 of 3 units. 2. Nursing failed to ensure medication was stored in the packaging containers or other dispensing system in which it was received. 3. Nursing failed to ensure medications were dated once opened, and stored according to manufacturer's guidelines, in two of three medication carts observed. Findings include: The facility policy titled Medication Labeling and Storage, undated, indicated the following: -The facility stores all medications and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature, humidity and light control. Only authorized personnel have access to keys -Medication and biologicals are stored in the packaging containers or other dispensing system in which they are received. Only the issuing pharmacy is authorized to transfer medications between containers. 1. On 2/11/25 at 6:55 A.M., the surveyor observed an unlocked and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that staff dated resident food and drinks in three of three unit kitchenette refrigerators. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled Food Brought by Family/Visitors indicated, but was not limited to, the following: - Food brought to the facility by visitors and family is permitted. Facility staff will strive to balance resident choice and a homelike environment with the nutritional and safety needs of residents. - Family members and visitors are asked to inform nursing staff when foods are brought for a resident. Food brought by family/visitors that is left with the resident to consume later is labeled and stored in a manner that it is clearly distinguishable from facility-prepared food. o Perishable foods are stored in re-sealable containers with tight-fitting lids in a refrigerator. Containers are labeled with the resident's name, the item and the use by date. - The nursing staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-14 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Nursing staff completed the required 12 hours (no less than ) of annual training, which at minimum includes dementia training for 4 out of 5 employee records reviewed. Findings include: The facility policy titled Staff Education and Competency, undated, indicated the following: -Education is a key component to ensuring that our residents receive quality care. Education is provided to staff in various formats. We use Relias© as an online training resource. In addition, we provide both individual and group training sessions. -Education begins at orientation which includes job specific training. All new staff receive a general orientation to core facility processes, policies, and procedures. Orientation training topics include, but are not limited to, hand hygiene, infection control, bloodborne pathogens, resident rights, abuse and neglect, HIPAA, dementia and behavior management, fire safety, disaster preparedness, emergency response, workplace safety, and additional topics as required by the State of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide a dignified existence for one Resident (#110) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically: For Resident #110, who is dependent on staff for feeding, the staff stood beside the bed, looking down at Resident #110, rather than seated at eye level while feeding him/her meals. Findings include: The facility policy titled Dignity, dated February 2021, indicates the following: -Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life and feelings of self-worth ad self-esteem. -5. When assisting with care, residents are supported in exercising their rights. For example, residents are: e. provided with a dignified dining experience. Resident #110 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 and has diagnoses that include Alzheimer's disease, history of falling and hemiplegia affecting right dominant side. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/18/24, indicated that on the Brief Interview for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident protected health information (PHI) was secure and not visible to others on two of three nursing units. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Confidentiality of Information and Personal Privacy, dated as revised February 2021, indicated the following: 1. The facility will safeguard the personal privacy and confidentiality of all resident personal and medical records. 2. The facility will strive to protect the resident's privacy regarding his or her: b. medical treatment 4. Access to resident personal and medical records will be limited to authorized staff and business associates. On 2/11/25 at 8:28 A.M., the surveyor observed an unattended medication cart on the third-floor unit. The computer on top of the cart was open, displaying a resident's name and a list of his/her medications. During an interview on 2/11/25 at 8:31 A.M., with Nurse #5 said that the screen on her computer, displaying a resident's medical information, should be privatized and not left open when unattended. On 2/11/25 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to complete an assessment for an air mattress with bolsters for one Resident #87 out of a sample of 30 Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to complete a restraints assessment before applying an air mattress with bolsters in the Resident's bed. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled 'Use of Restraints' with a revision date of April 2017 indicated the following: - Physical Restraints are defined as any manual method or mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot remove easily, which restricts freedom of movement or restricts normal access to one's body. -The definition of a restraint is based on the functional status of the resident and not the device. If the resident cannot remove a device in the same manner in which the staff applied it given that resident's physical condition (i.e., side rails are put back down, rather than climbed over), and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to report injuries of unknown origin to facility administration for two Residents (#87 and #118) out of a sample of 30 Residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #87, the facility failed to report an X-ray (X-radiation-images created inside of a body by passing beams of radiation through the body) positive for a fracture from an unknown origin. 2. For Resident #118 the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and notify facility administration of a new fracture (an acute right intertrochanteric [thigh bone] fracture) of unknown origin. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled, 'Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation-Reporting and Investigating' with a revision date of September 2022 indicated the following: -All reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation are reported to local, state and federal agencies (as required by current regulations) and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin (a fracture), for one Resident (#118) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically for Resident #118 who on 1/4/25 experienced pain which was new and on 1/5/25 Resident #118 was found to have an acute right intertrochanteric (thigh bone) fracture, the facility failed to conduct interviews from staff members (on all shifts) who had contact with the resident during the period of the alleged incident. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigating, dated as revised September 2022, indicated that all reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/ misappropriation of resident property are reported to local, state and federal agencies (as required by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of all investigations are documented and reported. - Investigating Allegations 7. The individual…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to meet professional standards of practice for one Resident (#113) out of a total of sample of 30 residents. Specifically, for Resident #113, the facility failed to ensure nursing clarified a physician's orders for two different suprapubic (SPT) catheter flushes. Findings include: Resident #113 was admitted to the facility in April 2024 with diagnoses including neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, diabetes, and depression. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/8/25, indicated that Resident #113 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status exam score of 15 out of 15. The MDS further indicated Resident #113 required an indwelling catheter. Review of Resident #113's active physician's order, dated 12/7/24, indicated: -Flush SPT three times daily (3x/day) by using 50 cc catheter tip syringe and normal saline and injecting through yellow port of the SPT into the bladder and aspirating to ensure drainage, three times a day. Scheduled three times daily at 6:00 A.M.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to document the recapitulation of the Resident's stay that included his/her course of illness/treatment for one Resident (#123), of two closed records Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Discharge Summary and Plan, dated as revised October 2022, indicated the following: -When a resident's discharge is anticipated, a discharge summary and post discharge plan is developed to assist the resident with discharge. 1. The discharge summary includes a recapitulation of the resident's stay at the facility and a final summary of the resident's stats at the time of discharge in accordance with established regulations governing release of resident information and as permitted by the resident. The discharge summary shall include a description of the resident's: 1. current diagnosis; b. medical history; c. current illness, treatment and/or therapy since entering the facility; d. current laboratory, radiology, consultation and diagnostic test results; e. physical and mental functional status; f. ability to perform…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) for three dependent Residents (#61, #15 and #48) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1) Provide assistance with grooming for Resident #61. 2) Provide supervision with meals for Resident #15. 3) Provide assistance with grooming for Resident #48. Findings Include: Review of the undated facility policy, titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting, revised in March 2018, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: - Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs). - Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. 1) Resident #61 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with a diagnosis…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and records reviewed, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to ensure one Resident (#15) out of a total sample of 30 Residents, was able to effectively communicate his/her needs. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Translation and/or Interpretation Services, dated 2021, indicated the following: -This facility will ensure that individuals who are non-English speaking or have a communication disability will have access to translation and/or interpretation methods. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. The facility will determine a means to communicate with any resident admitted who is non-English speaking and/or has a communication disability. 2. The facility utilizes Interactive Voice Response (IVR) to connect to an interpreter for limited Englich proficient residents. 3. The facility uses Cue Cards (Communication Boards) to assist health professionals and residents who have English language difficulties or communication difficulties to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure interventions to treat contracture management were implemented for one Resident (#26) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure palm protectors were in place. Findings include; The facility policy titled titled Resident Mobility and Range of Motion, dated July 2017, indicated the following: 2. Residents with limited range of motion will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent a further decrease in ROM (range of motion). 5. The care plan will include specific interventions, exercises and therapies to maintain, \prevent avoidable decline in, and/or improve mobility and range of motion. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility in August 2021 and has diagnoses that include Alzheimer's disease and unspecified lack of coordination. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/27/24, indicated Resident #26 was dependent on staff for all Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Review of the Occupational Therapy (OT) treatment note,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to implement a physician ordered intervention to mitigate injury from an accident for one Resident (#110) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a fall mat was in place when Resident #110 was in bed. Findings include: The facility policy titled Falls-Clinical Protocol, dated as revised September 2012, indicated the following: -Treatment/Management: 1. Based on preceding assessment, the staff and physician will identify pertinent interventions to try to prevent subsequent falls and to address risks of serious consequences of falling. The facility policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, dated as revised March 2022, indicated the following: 9. Care plan interventions are chosen only after data gathering, proper sequencing of events, careful consideration of the relationship between the resident's problem areas and their causes, and relevant clinical decision making. Resident #110 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 and has diagnoses that include…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice for Foley catheter care for two residents (#38 and #133) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #38, the facility failed to ensure they obtained physician's orders for the correct indwelling catheter size. 2. For Resident #133, the facility failed to ensure Nurse #8 inserted the correct size suprapubic tube (SPT) into his/her bladder. Finding include: Review of the facility policy titled Catheter Care, Urinary, dated as revised August 2022, indicated that the purpose of this procedure is to prevent urinary catheter- associated complications, including urinary tract infections. Changing Catheters 2. Change catheters and drainage bags based on clinical indications such as infection, obstruction, or when the closed system is compromised. 1.) Resident #38 was admitted to the facility in September 2024 with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation, low back pain, and chronic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview for one Resident (#375) of a total sample of 30 residents, the facility failed to provide sufficient fluid intake as ordered by the physician. Specifically, for Resident #375 the facility failed to ensure nursing provided free water bolus' (FWB) consistently as ordered by the physician. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Enteral Nutrition dated as revised November 2018, indicated that adequate nutritional support through enteral nutrition is provided to residents as ordered. 3. The dietitian, with input from the provider and nurse: d. calculates fluids to be provided (beyond free fluids in formula). Resident #375 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses including vascular dementia, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Review of Resident #375's hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated the following: - Nutrition following, Jevity 1.5 tube feeding rate of 100 milliliters (mL) per hour from 10:00 P.M., to 10:00 A.M., with 175…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that respiratory care and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, were provided for one Resident (#38), out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically, for Resident #38, the facility failed to ensure that nursing changed Resident #38's oxygen tubing as ordered by the physician. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, dated as revised October 2010, indicated the purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for safe oxygen administration. 1. Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. Review physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. Resident #38 was admitted to the facility in September 2024 with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation, low back pain, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/18/24, indicated that Resident #38 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15. This…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure nursing was competent and had the required skill set to provide necessary care for residents' needs. Specifically, for Resident #60, the facility failed to ensure that nursing prepared medications in a safe manner. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Administering Medications, dated as revised April 2019, indicated that medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. 10. The individual administering the medication checks the label THREE (3) times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time and right method (route) of administration before giving the medication. 22. The individual administering the medication initials the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) on the appropriate line after giving each medication and before administering the next ones. Resident #60 was admitted to the facility in June 2023 with diagnosis including epilepsy, diabetes, and heart failure. On 2/12/25 at 9:39 A.M. until 9:40 A.M., the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure accuracy of the medical record for two Residents (#110 and #13) out of a total sample of 30 residents. Specifically: 1. For Resident #110 the staff inaccurately documented in the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) regarding a resident fall mat. 2. For Resident #13 staff inaccurately documented that blood pressure readings were taken using the Resident's left arm when they were not. Findings include: 1. Resident #110 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 and has diagnoses that include Alzheimer's disease, history of falling and hemiplegia affecting right dominant side. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Se (MDS) assessment, dated 12/18/24, indicated that on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam Resident #110 scored a 3 out of a possible 15, indicating severely impaired cognition. The MDS further indicated Resident #110 had no behavior of rejecting care and was dependent on staff for all Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Review of the falls report for Resident #110, dated 8/11/24,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-20 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, and interview the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience in the dining room of the third floor unit, and for three Residents (#36, #96, and #102) out of a total sample of 28 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that residents seated at the same table were served meals at the same time, that staff did not refer to residents as feeds or feeders in the presence of residents, that staff did not refer to clothing protectors as bibs, and that staff did not stand while providing feeding assistance to three Residents (#36, #96, and #102). Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled Dignity, initiated November 2023, indicated the following: -Resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect and individuality. -Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times. -Resident independence and dignity will be promoted while dinning, such as avoiding: a. Daily use of disposable…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food was labeled, unpasteurized eggs were cooked thoroughly, and that ready to eat food was not handled using contaminated gloves. Findings include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled General Food Preparation and Handling, indicated, but was not limited to, the following: -Food items will be prepared to conserve maximum nutritive value, develop and enhance flavor and keep free of injurious organisms and substances. -The kitchen and equipment are clean and sanitized as appropriate. -No raw eggs are to be served. They must be cooked. Pasteurized eggs are the exception (these may be served soft cooked). -Leftovers must be dated, labeled, covered, cooled, and stored (within ½ hour after cooking or service) in a refrigerator. -All food service equipment should be cleaned, sanitized, dried, and reassembled after each use. -Use tongs or other serving utensils to serve…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, policy review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure infection control standards of practice for the prevention of infections were implemented. Specifically: 1. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff appropriately discarded contaminated personal protective equipment (PPE) and performed hand hygiene after caring for a Resident on contact precautions. 2. For the Director of Housekeeping, the facility failed to ensure he wore gloves and cleaned his hands after handling soiled clothing. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy 'Transmission-Based Precautions', dated 3/2023, indicated, but was not limited to: - Contact precautions may be implemented for residents known or suspected to be infected with microorganisms that can be transmitted by direct contact with the resident or indirect contact with environmental surfaces or resident-care items in the resident's environment. - Gloves will be removed and hand hygiene performed before leaving the room. - Staff will avoid touching potentially contaminated environmental surfaces or items in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-20 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that concerns addressed by the Resident Council Group ha sufficient follow-up to address and prevent recurrence. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Grievances/Complaints: Residents, Resident Representatives, Family Members or Resident Advocates, last revised 12/21, indicated the following: -Our facility will assist residents, their representatives, family members, or resident advocates in filing grievances or complaints when concerns are expressed, which may not be able to be handled immediately by facility staff, requires further investigation or requires consultation with other facility staff, the attending physician or outside service providers. -Any resident, his/her representative, family member or advocate may file a grievance or complaint concerning treatment, facility services, medical care, behavior of other residents or staff members, theft or damage of property, etc., without fear of threat or reprisal in any form, missing items should be reported on the missing item…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-20 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment on one out of three units. Specifically, the facility served meals on plastic trays and did not use table linens during mealtimes in the dining room of the third floor unit. Findings include: On 2/14/24 at 8:57 A.M., the surveyor observed 15 residents eating breakfast in the dining room of the third-floor unit. All meals were served on top of plastic trays and there were no tablecloths or linens set on the tables. On 2/15/24 at 9:04 A.M., the surveyor observed 18 residents eating breakfast in the dining room of the third-floor unit. All meals were served on top of plastic trays and there were no tablecloths or linens set on the tables. On 2/16/24 at 8:43 A.M., the surveyor observed 10 residents eating breakfast in the dining room of the third-floor unit. All meals were served on top of plastic trays and there were no tablecloths or linens set on the tables. On 2/16/24 at 12:44 P.M., the surveyor observed 12 residents eating lunch in the dining room of the third-floor unit. All meals were served…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, policy review, record review and interviews for two Residents (#92 and #24) out of a total sample of 28 residents, the facility failed to provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living. Specifically: 1. For Resident #92, the facility failed to provide the needed supervision and assistance with eating. 2. For Resident #24, the facility failed to assist with grooming, specifically removal of chin hair. Findings include: The facility policy titled 'Activities of Daily Living (ADLs)' dated March 2022, indicated Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. 1. Resident #92 was admitted to the facility in June 2022 and has diagnoses that include dysphagia (difficulty chewing and swallowing) and dementia. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/20/23, indicated Resident #92 scored a 0 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-20 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, record review and interview, the facility failed to offer services to maintain vision for one Resident (#42) out of a total of 28 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Optometric Services, dated April 2022, indicated the following: -The facility will assist residents to obtain regular and emergency optometric care. -The facility will maintain a service agreement with an outside organization to provide all optometric care required by residents of the facility. The service agreement will ensure that all residents may have a comprehensive eye exam as regulated by the state and federal law, prescriptive eyewear, optical aids, and other optometric care required by the residents of the facility. Resident #42 was admitted to the facility in August 2021 with diagnoses including dementia, cerebral infarct, and hypertension. Review of Resident #42's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated the Resident had a Brief…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-20 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, policy review, and records reviewed for one Resident (#27), out of 28 total sampled residents, the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services to prevent the development and promote healing of pressure ulcers. Specifically, the facility failed to implement a physician's order to offload the heels of Resident #27, who was assessed by nursing to be at high risk for skin breakdown. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Pressure Injury Management Program Evaluating Risk, Prevention, Support Planning, Treatment, and Monitoring', dated March 2022, indicated, but was not limited to: -It is important to recognize and evaluate each resident's risk factors and to identify and evaluate all areas at risk of constant pressure. -Pressure Points and Tissue Tolerance: ii. Heels -Interventions may include: -Redistribute pressure (such as repositioning, protecting heels, etc.) -The facility is expected to document and address the resident's concerns and offer relevant alternatives if the resident has refused specific treatments.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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, policy review, records reviewed and interviews for two Residents (#72 and #21) of 28 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered according to the physicians' orders. Specifically: 1. For Resident #72, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for the continuous use of oxygen. 2. For Resident #21, the facility failed to administer the correct amount of oxygen, based on the physician's order. Findings include: Review of the facility policy 'Oxygen Administration by Nasal Cannula and Mask', dated as revised March 2022, indicated the following: Residents who require oxygen will have a physician order which includes the following: - Oxygen flow rate. - How the oxygen is administered i.e.; nasal cannula or mask. - Oxygen tubing will be changed weekly. 1. Resident #72 was admitted to the facility in January 2024 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 1/23/24, indicated Resident #72…
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.
- No harm found · B2025-02-14 · tag F0844 — patternFollow rules about disclosure of ownership requirements and tell the state agency about changes in ownership and/or administrative personnel.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interviews and reviews of the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS-State Agency reporting system), the facility failed to provide written notice to the State Agency of a change in the Administrator as required. Findings include: Review of the Facility Administrator Contact Information from, dated 2/11/25, indicated the current Administrator start date of 11/1/24. Review of the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS) on 2/11/25, failed to include documentation to support the facility provided written notice to the State Agency of the change of the facility's Administrator. During an interview on 2/12/25 at 10:25 A.M., the Director of Nursing said that she thought that the State Agency was made aware of the change in Administrator. During an interview on 2/12/25 at 3:30 P.M., the Administrator said he was not aware that the State Agency was not made aware of the change in Administrator, but the state agency should have been made aware of the change.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$48,790 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $48,790 — penalty dated 2026-02-20
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 MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES — 87 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.3 | +1.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
The other 86 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 86; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| POPULAR BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 11/01/2024 |
| DOYLE, STEPHEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| HARMAN, DINA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| VEIGA, CARLY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| VIROJA, YOGESH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| POSEN, MINDEE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/23/2025 |
| MARQUIS LIMITED LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/04/2025 |
| RELIANT PRO REHAB LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/22/2025 |
| NISAR, SAIRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| FLAGLER, OSHER | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/28/2025 |
| KAHANOW, AVIVA | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/28/2025 |
| LEVOVITZ, TZVI | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/28/2025 |
| ROKEACH, FRAIDE | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/28/2025 |
| ROKOWSKY, YITZCHOK | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/28/2025 |
| NFR 2020 IRRV TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| QUINTO NEXGEN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| RSBRMK HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| SK NEXGEN TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| TRYKO NEXGEN HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| UAK 2020 IRRV TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| UKR NEXGEN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| YK NEXGEN TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| YR NEXGEN TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 24 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
13 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.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225297. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-20, 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.