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

Masconomet Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center

123 High Street, Topsfield, MA 01983 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 123 certified beds · (978) 887-7002 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (978) 887-7002 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Resident-funds citation (F0568)Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
  • its payroll-based staffing 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
311 Newbury St · (800) 746-7287 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
311 Newbury St · (978) 777-5504 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
30 Main St · (978) 887-5921 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.9%16.4%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.2%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms32.9%15.5%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.5%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened24.3%15.4%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.5%19.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.2%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.3%21.2%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table21.9%21.4%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.8%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.3%77.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.6%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit9.9%11.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.631.881.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.611.501.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

54.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 370 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

54.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
13.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
17.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.37U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.14hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 17.8% 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 213 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 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 64% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 30% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF54.2%CMS range 49.5–58.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF13.5%CMS range 10.4–16.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge17.8%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge19.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge20.7%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified93.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting99.3%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.3%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.2%CMS range 4.2–9.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.911.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.68
RN hours/ resident / day
0.99
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.01
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.68
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.47
RN hoursweekends
54.8%
Total nursing turnover
45.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 123 beds and averages 115.4 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.80 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.77 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-12)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-20)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · F2026-03-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and handle food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, potentially putting the residents at risk for foodborne illness. Specifically, the facility failed to:1. Ensure that food was stored, labeled, and dated properly, and that food/beverages were not expired; and2. Ensure staff did not handle ready-to-eat food with contaminated gloves. Findings include:1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Receiving and Storage, dated November 2022, indicated but was not limited to the following:-All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer are covered, labeled and dated ( use by date).-Refrigerated foods are labeled, dated and monitored so they are used by their use by date, frozen, or discarded.-Uncooked and raw animal products and fish are stored separately in drip-proof containers and below fruits, vegetables, and other ready-to-eat foods to prevent meat juices from dripping onto these foods.-Foods and snacks kept on nursing units: beverages are dated when opened and discarded after…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure one Resident's (#91) hand roll was in place as ordered by the physician, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include:Review of the policy titled Resident Mobility and Range of Motion, dated as revised July 2017, indicated: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). 6. Interventions may include therapies, the provision of necessary equipment, and/or exercises and will be based on professional standards of practice and will be consistent with state laws and practice acts. 8. Documentation of the resident's progress toward the goals and objectives will include attempts to address any changes or decline in the resident's condition or needs. Resident #91 was admitted to the facility in November 2024 and has diagnoses that include hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting left dominant side. Review of Resident #91's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS)…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and interviews, for one Resident (#77), out of 26 sampled residents, the facility failed to provide an environment free of accidents and hazards to prevent injury. Specifically, for Resident #77, who has a history of repeated falls, the facility failed to ensure fall mats were in place as ordered by the physician. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Falls and Fall Risk, Managing, dated as revised March 2018, indicated:Resident-Centered Approaches to Managing Falls and Fall Risk.1. The staff, with the input of the attending physician, will implement a resident-centered fall prevention plan to reduce the specific risk factor(s) of falls for each resident at risk or with a history of falls. Resident #77 was admitted to the facility in November 2024 and has diagnoses that include dementia, anxiety disorder, and repeated falls. Review of Resident #77's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/12/26, indicated on the Brief Interview for Mental Status exam Resident #77 scored 3 out of a possible 15, indicating severely…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that respiratory care and services consistent with professional standards of practice, and in accordance with physician's orders were provided for two Residents (#67 and #112), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #67, to ensure Oxygen was administered in accordance with the physician's order; and 2. For Resident #112, to ensure Oxygen was administered according to the physician's orders, nebulizer (a medical device that converts liquid medication into a fine, breathable mist for direct inhalation into the lungs through a mask or mouthpiece) tubing was dated, and a nebulizer mask was stored appropriately. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Administration, dated October 2010, indicated the following: -Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. -Observe the resident upon setup and periodically thereafter to be sure oxygen is…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biologicals in accordance with State and Federal laws. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure medications were dated once opened according to manufacturer's guidelines in one of three medication carts observed. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled 'Medication Labeling and Storage', revised February 2023, indicated:-Labeling of medications and biologicals dispensed by the pharmacy is consistent with applicable federal and state requirements and currently accepted pharmaceutical practices.-Multi-dose vials that are not opened or accessed are discarded according to the manufacturer's expiration. On 3/11/26 at 6:55 A.M., the surveyor and Nurse #1 observed the following in the Gould unit medication cart:-One Fluticasone Furoate inhaler, opened and undated.-Spiriva Handihaler inhaler, opened and undated.-Ipratropium Bromide nasal solution, opened and undated.-Liquid protein supplement, opened and undated. During an interview on 3/11/26 at 7:05 A.M., Nurse #1 said 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure transmission-based precautions were followed to prevent the spread of infections for one Resident (#7), out of 26 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented enhanced barrier precautions for Resident #7, who had a chronic stage three pressure ulcer. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled 'Enhanced Barrier Precautions', revised 2/5/25, indicated:-It is the policy of this facility to implement enhanced barrier precautions for the prevention of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms.-Initiation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions: An order for enhanced barrier precautions will be obtained for residents with any of the following: Wounds (e.g. chronic wounds such as pressure ulcers). -Implementation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions: PPE (personal protective equipment) for enhanced barrier precautions is only necessary when performing high-contact care activities.-High-contact care activities include dressing, bathing, transferring, providing…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-03-20 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure that PRN (as needed) ordered psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days for four Residents (#32, #85, #421 and #424) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, 1. For Resident #32, the facility failed to implement a 14 day stop date for a PRN Ativan (an antianxiety medication). 2. For Resident #85, the facility failed to implement a 14 day stop date for a PRN Clonazepam (an antianxiety medication). 3. For Resident #421, the facility failed to implement a 14 day stop date for a PRN Clonazepam (an antianxiety medication). 4. For Resident #424, the facility failed to implement a 14 day stop date for a PRN Ativan (an antianxiety medication) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Psychotropic Medication Use' undated, indicated the following but not limited to: -A psychotropic medication is any medication that affects brain activity associated with mental processes and behavior. -Drugs in the following categories are…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-20 · tag F0568 — isolated
    Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
    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 provide quarterly financial statements for one Resident (#89) with a Personal Needs Account (PNA) out of a sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide quarterly financial statements to his/her Conservator. Findings include: Resident #89 was admitted to the facility in April, 2023 with diagnoses including dementia. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 12 out of a possible 15 indicating moderate impairment. Review of the medical record indicated that Resident #89 has a decree of Conservatorship dated 12/21/23. (A Conservator is a court-appointed individual responsible for managing the financial affairs and property of a protected person who is deemed unable to do so themselves). During an interview on 3/19/25 at 10:03 A.M., the Business Office Manager (BOM) said Resident #89 has a PNA account. She said the facility has been the representative payee ( a…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review and interview the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive resident-centered care plan for one Resident (#92) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, for Resident #92, the facility failed to develop a care plan for use of a psychotropic medication (used to treat or manage a psychiatric symptoms or challenging behavior). Findings include: Resident #92 was admitted to the facility in March 2023 with diagnoses including anxiety and dementia. Review of the physician orders dated March 2025 indicated the following orders: -Valproic acid (mood stabilizer) solution; 250 mg (milligrams)/5 mL (milliliters); amount 2.5 ml; oral twice a day for anxiety. Review of the current care plan for Resident #92 failed to indicate a focus, goals and interventions for the use of the mood stabilizer medication Valproic Acid. During an interview on 3/19/25 at 12:14 P.M., with Nurse #1 she said she did not know how to monitor a resident for adverse effects of a psychotropic medication. During an interview on 3/19/25 at 12:19 P.M., Nurse #2 she…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for 3 Residents (#97, #421, and #424) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically; 1. For Resident #97, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for a weekly skin check. 2. For Resident #421, the facility failed to follow physician's order for air mattress setting. 3. For Resident #424, the facility failed to follow physician's order for air mattress setting. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled Prevention of Pressure Ulcers, dated April 2020, indicated the following: - Assess the resident on admission (within eight hours) for existing pressure injury risk factors. Repeat the risk assessment weekly and upon any changes in condition. Resident #97 was admitted in September 2023 with diagnoses including osteoarthritis and failure to thrive. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated Resident #97 scored a 14 out of a possible 15 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-20 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to maintain respiratory equipment according to professional standards of practice for one Resident (#83), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, For Resident #83, the facility failed to ensure the oxygen concentrator and filter were clean. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy, titled 'Oxygen Concentrator', dated 12/3/24, indicated the purpose is to establish responsibilities for the care and use of oxygen concentrators. -The main body cabinet should be dusted when needed and can be wiped clean with damp cloth and mild household cleaner if necessary. On 3/18/25 9:15 A.M., the surveyor observed the oxygen filter on the oxygen concentration had a layer of gray dust and the main body cabinet had a layer of powder and gray dust. Review of Resident #83's physician order, dated 2/19/24, indicated oxygen- change tubing, rinse filter, wipe down concentrator weekly. Label/date/bag tubing with each change. Once a day on Tuesday nights Review of Resident #83's Treatment Administration Record…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-20 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement a pharmacy recommendation for one Resident (#85) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled 'Medication Regimen Review' dated April 2024, indicated the following but not limited to: -Facility staff shall act upon all recommendations according to procedures for addressing medication regimen review irregularities. Resident #85 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 with diagnoses including anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #85's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/30/25, indicated the Resident score a 15 out of a possible 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating he/she was cognitively intact. Review of the consultant pharmacist recommendation to prescriber report dated 2/16/25 indicated the following: -Resident is receiving the following PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication. These medications are required to be re-evaluated after 14 days. If therapy is to be continued beyond 14 days, please note medical…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide 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 interview, record and policy review, the facility failed follow professional standards for weight management for one Resident (#101) out of a total sample of 5 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to conduct reweights for weights outside of acceptable parameters per facility policy. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Weighing and Measuring, revised 10/2019 indicated: Residents are weighed: On admission or readmission (Do NOT use prior hospital weight) Weekly for the first 4 weeks after admission Monthly thereafter Per physician's order K. Check current weight against prior recorded weight L. Notify the licensed nurse if weight is three or more pounds different (gain or loss) from prior weight M. Re-weigh the resident within 24 hours to verify accuracy of the weight N. Record the re-weight in the Vital Signs section of the electronic medical record Resident #101 was admitted to the facility in January of 2024 with diagnoses including Type 2 diabetes mellitus (non…

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

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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ATLAS HEALTHCARE — 29 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.6-0.6 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.1-0.1 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.4-1.4 vs chain
The other 28 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
2 of 5Atlas Post Acute At Woodbury Country ClubWoodbury, NJ 2 of 5Haverhill Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterHaverhill, MA 2 of 5Port Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterNewburyport, MA 2 of 5Rossville Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBaltimore, MD 2 of 5The Elms Rehab And Healthcare Center Of CranburyCranbury, NJ 2 of 5Village Green Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBristol, CT 2 of 5Wynwood Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterCinnaminson, NJ 3 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation And Healthcare At Daughters OClifton, NJ 3 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation And Healthcare At WashingtonSewell, NJ 3 of 5Nemasket Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMiddleborough, MA 3 of 5Oak Knoll Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterFramingham, MA 3 of 5Roland Park Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBaltimore, MD 4 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation And Healthcare At MaywoodMaywood, NJ 4 of 5Cedar Grove Respiratory And Nursing CenterWilliamstown, NJ 4 of 5Hathorne Hill Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterDanvers, MA 4 of 5Meadowbrook Respiratory And Nursing CenterMatawan, NJ 4 of 5Mystic Meadows Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterLittle Egg Harbor Tw, NJ 4 of 5Shrewsbury Rehabilitation And Nursing At SouthgateShrewsbury, MA 4 of 5Sippican Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMarion, MA 4 of 5Suffield House Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenteSuffield, CT 4 of 5Towson Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterTowson, MD 5 of 5Atlas Rehabilitation & Healthcare At West DeptforWest Deptford, NJ 5 of 5Birchwood Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterCranford, NJ 5 of 5Bride Brook Rehabilitation & Nursing CenterNiantic, CT 5 of 5Manchester Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterManchester, CT 5 of 5Pendleton Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterMystic, CT 5 of 5Vernon Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterVernon, CT 5 of 5Waterfront Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterRaritan, NJ

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
WHITTIER MOP OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 02/28/2025
JMH FAMILY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
JMH FAMILY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
MLS FAMILY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
MLS FAMILY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
SGS FAMILY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
SGS FAMILY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
WHITTIER 6 OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
MILLER, NACHUMIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/28/2025
BAK, PINCHOSIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025
WHITTIER OPCO MANAGER LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025
BEARSE, BROOKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025
ELMS, DIANEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025
SONNENSCHEIN, MOSHEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025
UDOM, CHIEKEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025
GLEN OAK 11, LLCOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 02/28/2025
MALT FAMILY TRUSTOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 02/28/2025
SGS 2010 FAMILY TRUSTOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 02/28/2025
TYH 2017 TRUSTOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 02/28/2025
GOLDBERGER, SHLOMOIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 43 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$15.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-2.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense8% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 13%Other / private 27%

This home reported $1.3M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$403per resident / day
operating cost
$12,243per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$392per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225750. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next