Webster Manor Rehabilitation & Health Care Center
745 School Street, Webster, MA 01570 · For profit - Corporation · 135 certified beds · (508) 949-0644 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (42) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 held steady at 2 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 | 9.4% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.0% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.6% | 1.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 22.5% | 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 | 3.3% | 3.4% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 19.2% | 15.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.5% | 19.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.6% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 31.7% | 21.2% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.3% | 21.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 57.7% | 77.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.5% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.2% | 11.9% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.82 | 1.88 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.41 | 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.
51.7% 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 78 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 64.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 51 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 31% 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 | 51.7%CMS range 39.5–64.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.6%CMS range 9.5–17.3 | 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 | 64.7% | 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 | 54.9% | 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 | 49.0% | 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 | 95.5% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 1.5% | 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 | 6.0%CMS range 3.3–11.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.90 | 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 135 beds and averages 121.9 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 13 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 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 2.80 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.46 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
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.
42 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 32 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-12 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who required medication to treat hypotension (low blood pressure) and had a Physician's order to hold (not administer) the medication for a systolic blood pressure (SBP-top number, represents the pressure in arteries when the heart contracts) greater than 120, the Facility failed to ensure the resident was free from significant medication errors when he/she was administered the medication outside of the prescribed parameter, placing him/her at risk for high blood pressure.Findings include:Review of the Facility policy titled, Oral Medication Administration, revised 2024, indicated Facility staff should:-Review and confirm medication orders for each individual resident on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) prior to administering medications to each resident.-Review the MAR for any tests or vital signs that need to be determined prior to preparing the medication.-Obtain and record any vital signs or other monitoring parameters ordered or deemed necessary prior to mediation…
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 before2026-05-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for two of three sampled residents, (Resident #1 and Resident #2), the Facility failed to ensure they maintained complete and accurate medical records, when their Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Flow Sheets were incomplete.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, POC (point of care) Documentation Skill Sheet, dated 10/27/23, indicated:-You must chart every time you give care to a resident-You must complete all charting before leaving-If it's not documented, it means it was not doneResident #1 was admitted to the Facility in March 2026, diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen), urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and orthostatic hypotension (sudden drop in blood pressure when standing up).Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 04/06/26 indicated he/she required various levels of staff assistance with his/her Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) including but not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who was found to have an injury (new bruise), the Facility failed to ensure he/she was provided with quality of care and services in accordance with his/her comprehensive person-centered plan of care, when although the facility was unable to determine exactly when or how the injury occurred, as a result of their investigation it was determined that gait belts were not consistently being used by staff during transfers, in accordance with facility policy, therefore placing Resident #1 and other residents at risk for potential injury. Findings include:Review of the Facility Policy titled, Gait Belt Use, dated April 2025, indicated gait belts must be used when physically transferring or ambulating residents.Review of the Report submitted by the Facility via the Health Care Facility Reporting System (HCFRS), dated 01/23/26, indicated Resident #1 had sustained a fracture. The Report indicated the fracture was likely sustained during a transfer from chair to bed.Resident #1 was admitted to 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 · E2025-04-10 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff on two resident Units (Lake Unit and Tapestry Unit) out of three resident units, to attain/maintain the highest physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Provide sufficient nursing staff to ensure all residents on the Lake Unit, including Resident #119, were provided with timely morning activity of daily living (ADL) care. -Provide sufficient nursing staff to ensure all residents on the Lake and Tapestry Units were provided timely medication administration. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment, last reviewed 3/26/25, indicated the following: -The facility's capacity was 135 with an average daily census of 124.87 residents. -For bathing, the facility had an average of 79 residents requiring assistance of one to two staff and an average of 35 residents who were dependent on staff. -For dressing, the facility had an average of 86 residents requiring assistance of one to two staff and an average of 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 before2025-04-10 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to serve food that was palatable, and at a safe and appetizing temperature on one Unit ([NAME] Unit) out of three units observed. Findings include: During the initial screening process on 4/6/25 the following comments were made by Residents relative to the food served at the facility: -Hot food is always cold. Staff do not offer to reheat the food. -Hot food is never hot, it is always cold. Staff do offer to warm it up in microwave but then everything is over cooked. -Hot food is cold by the time it is served to him/her in his/her room. -Hot food comes lukewarm at times but is most often cold. -Never get hot meals. -Food comes lukewarm. During the Resident Council meeting held on 4/7/25 from 11:00 A.M. to 11:50 A.M., 12 of the 24 Resident's in attendance said the hot food served at the facility is often served cold. Review of the 1/28/25 Resident Council Meeting minutes indicated the Residents expressed food was cold. Review of 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 · E2025-04-10 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Maintain meal carts and coffee carts in a sanitary manner for meal service for residents. -Maintain the plate warmer in a clean and sanitary manner prior to housing plates in the plate warmer for meal service to residents. -Prepare coffee for residents in a sanitary manner. -Maintain the stand-up refrigerator and stand-up freezer in a clean and sanitary manner for food storage. Findings include: Review of the facility's Dietary Department Guidelines, dated January 2014, indicated the following: -The facility must store, prepare, and distribute food under sanitary conditions. -The Dietary Department will be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner to prevent food borne illness. -All areas of the Dietary Department will be cleaned on a regular schedule. -Logs/schedules will be kept of cleaning tasks as they are completed. On 4/6/25 between 7:20 A.M. and 8:00…
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 before2025-04-10 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that Pneumococcal immunizations were offered and administered for two Residents (#12 and #20) of five applicable residents, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Offer Pneumococcal immunization for Resident #12 when the Resident had been previously immunized and was not up-to-date with Pneumococcal immunization, which increased the Resident's risk for Pneumococcal disease. 2. Administer Pneumococcal immunization for Resident #20 when the Resident had been previously immunized, was not up-to-date with the Pneumococcal immunization, and consented to Pneumococcal immunization, which increased the Resident's risk for Pneumococcal disease. 3. Offer and administer Pneumococcal immunizations for each resident who was eligible for, and not up to date with Pneumococcal immunization, which increased each resident's risk for Pneumococcal disease. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Procedure…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide dignified experiences on two occasions during the survey period for one Resident (#119) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -ensure that Resident #119 was clothed so that his/her arm, chest, and back were not exposed while the Resident was sitting in a common area, on two separate occasions, when the Resident was dependent upon staff for dressing. -provide Resident #119 with a dignified dining experience during one noon time meal, relative to drink preferences and assistance for eating when the Resident was dependent on staff for assistance with eating. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Food and Dining Service, dated April 2015, indicated: -Table service is provided for all residents who can and will eat at the table, including wheelchair residents to help them maintain as normal a living pattern as possible. Resident #119 was admitted to the facility in March 2025 with diagnoses including bilateral conductive hearing loss, bilateral…
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 before2025-04-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment for two Residents (#38 and #86), out of a total sample size of 26 residents, and for one Unit ([NAME] Unit), out of three units observed. Specifically, 1. For Resident #38, the facility staff failed to maintain the Resident's wheelchair in a clean and sanitary manner when the Resident was dependent on the wheelchair use for mobility and the wheelchair was visibly soiled. 2. For Resident #86, the facility staff failed to maintain the Resident's wheelchair in a clean and sanitary manner when the Resident was dependent on the wheelchair for mobility and the wheelchair was visibly soiled. 3. For the [NAME] Unit, the facility failed to ensure resident care equipment and the building were maintained in clean condition and good repair. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Cleaning of Wheelchairs and GeriChairs (a specialized geriatric chair), undated, included but was not limited 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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to implement a person-centered care plan relative to feeding strategies for one Resident (#98), out of a total sample size of 26 residents. Specifically, for Resident #98, the facility staff failed to provide appropriate supervision during meals placing Resident #98 at risk for aspiration (entrance of food, liquid or other substance into a person's airway and lungs instead of being swallowed into the esophagus). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Aspiration Precautions, dated April 2015, included but was not limited to: -Aspiration Precautions will be utilized to reduce the risk of aspiration of food or liquid into a resident's lungs. <A resident with significant risk of aspiration, which is not completely controlled by current diet modifications, will require Aspiration Precautions by the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT). <Resident's needing Aspiration Precautions will be individualized. <The resident must be assessed by the Speech Language Pathologist (SLP) for the Aspiration Precautions 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.
Show the remaining 32 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice relative to an indwelling urinary catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine outside the body) for one Resident (#3) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -obtain a Physician order that included the accurate size indwelling urinary catheter required for the Resident, when the ordered and inserted catheter sized were different. -ensure the Resident had a leg bag to promote mobility and dignity/privacy when the Resident was out of bed. -provide Enhanced Barrier Precaution (EBP) during ADL (activities of daily living - washing, bathing, grooming) care of the Resident. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Urinary Leg Bag, dated April 2015, indicated: -The use of the leg bag for urinary catheter drainage is permitted whenever necessary to promote mobility, ease of ambulation, 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 · D2025-04-10 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide respiratory care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for three Residents (#123, #69, and #35) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, 1. For Resident #123, the facility failed to: -ensure that the oxygen concentrator was set at two (2) liters per minute (LPM) as ordered by the Physician. -ensure there was an indication for the use of oxygen. -ensure the staff provided a new nasal cannula to the Resident after his/her previous nasal cannula was contaminated after laying on the Resident's bedroom floor. 2. For Resident #69, to ensure a clean and sanitary oxygen concentrator (a device used to deliver supplemental oxygen) gross particle air intake filter in accordance with manufacturers guidelines placing the Resident at risk for impaired oxygen supply delivery and contamination. 3. For Resident #35, ensure Physician's orders were in place for the care and services of a Continuous Positive…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services for one Resident (#79), out of a total sample of 26 residents, who was diagnosed with Dementia, to attain or maintain his/her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Specifically, the facility failed to provide diversional interventions for Resident #79, according to the Resident's interests, when the Resident repeatedly paced the hallways of the Lake Unit and repeatedly vocalized, he/she did not know what to do. Findings include: Resident #79 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses including Dementia. Review of Resident #79's Care Plan indicated the following: -Resident is at risk to try to leave the nursing Unit, attempting to leave the facility, pacing, roaming/wandering in/out of peer rooms, initiated 2/5/25 and revised 2/17/25. -Encourage participation in positive meaningful activity programs of choice (2/5/25). -Establish and maintain daily routine to meet physical needs (2/5/25). -Ambulates with continual…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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 reviews, the facility failed to provide preferred food items for one Resident (#60) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide the Resident's preferred food items for two consecutive meals when the preferred food items were to be provided, as indicated on the Resident's meal tray card. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Food and Dining Service, dated April 2015, indicated the following: -In regard to likes and dislikes, whenever a resident expresses these, the nurse makes out a change in dietary needs form indicating the resident's feelings and this is forwarded to the Dining Services Department. -These preferences are recorded. Resident #60 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses including Diabetes and Protein-Calorie Malnutrition. Review of Resident #60's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated the Resident was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview…
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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to have an effective policy which addressed the reheating of residents' food brought into the facility in accordance with professional standards to ensure food safety. Specifically, the facility failed to provide a working thermometer and adequate reheating instructions to reheat residents' food brought into the facility by family to an internal temperature of 165 degrees Fahrenheit (F) to prevent potential foodborne illnesses. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Personal Food Policy, dated November 2016, indicated the following: -Facility staff will assist residents with accessing the nourishment kitchens, and with accessing and proper heating any personal food. -Staff will refer to the Reheating Chart (included with this policy) for specific reheating instructions. -Staff will use a thermometer to ensure the food is reheated adequately . -In order to assist family and visitors to understand safe food handling practice for microwave usage refer to the United States Department 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 · D2025-04-10 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an updated COVID-19 immunization was administered for one Resident (#20) of five applicable residents, out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to administer an updated 2024-2025 COVID-19 immunization for Resident #20 when the Resident had been previously immunized, was not up-to-date with the COVID-19 immunization, and consented to receive the updated 2024-2025 COVID-19 immunization, increasing the Resident's risk for COVID-19 infection. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled MA Coronavirus (COVID-19), undated, indicated the following: -The facility follows the professional standards and recommendations set forth by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), CMS, and State health care agencies regarding Coronavirus. -The facility will follow all CDC and State specific guidance for vaccination . Review of the CDC guidance titled Staying Up to Date with COVID-19 Vaccines, dated 1/7/25 and found 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 · F2024-03-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure 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, interview and policy review, the facility failed to store medications and biologicals under the proper temperature controls as required on two units (Lake Unit and Tapestry Unit) of three units in the facility. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure that medications and biologicals requiring refrigeration were stored within the required temperature range of 36° F (Fahrenheit) to 46°F. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of medications, dated 2017, indicated but was not limited to: -Medications and biologicals are stored at their appropriate temperatures and humidity according to the United States Pharmacopeia guidelines for temperature ranges. -Medications requiring refrigeration are kept in a refrigerator at a temperature between 36°F to 46°F with a thermometer to allow temperature monitoring. On 2/29/24 at 8:27 A.M., during the medication administration observation with Nurse #4, the surveyor and Nurse #4 entered the medication room on the first floor to retrieve a refrigerated medication Acidophilus (probiotic). 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 · Ecited before2024-03-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment relative to the resident dining experience on three of out three Units ([NAME] Unit, Tapestry Unit, and Lakeside Unit) dining rooms. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure that: -Residents seated together at the same table were served timely in the [NAME] Unit Dining Room, Tapestry Unit Dining Room and Lakeside Unit Dining Room. -Staff were seated while assisting residents with their meals in the [NAME] Unit Dining Room, Tapestry Unit Dining Room and Lakeside Unit Dining Room. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Food and Dining Service, dated April 2015, indicated table service is provided for all residents who can and will eat at the table including wheelchair residents to help maintain as normal a living pattern as possible. Review of the facility policy titled Food First- Nutrition, dated August 2015, included the following: -Residents will receive nourishing, attractive meals…
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 before2024-03-01 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure that resident meals were palatable, attractive, and provided to residents within appetizing and acceptable temperatures for one Resident (#74) and on two of three units observed. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1) For Resident #74, provide food that was palatable and at an appetizing temperature. 2) Respond to and address Resident Council concerns pertaining to food service. 3) Serve Resident meals timely, to preserve meal temperatures as indicated by test tray results. Findings include: Review of the facility document titled Reheating Chart, undated, indicated the serving temperatures at point of service (when the meal was received) was 135 degrees Fahrenheit (F) for hot food items. 1) Resident #74 was admitted to the facility in June 2021. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated the Resident was moderately impaired as evidenced by a score of 12 out of 15 on the Brief Interview 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 · Ecited before2024-03-01 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 to ensure that the Pneumococcal Vaccine was reviewed, offered and/or administered to three Residents (#6, #33 and # 67) out of five applicable residents, out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1. For Resident #6 and #33, offer the Pneumococcal Vaccine (PCV) after a consent had been obtained, placing the Residents at risk for contracting facility acquired Pneumonia. 2. For Resident #67, assess, review and/or offer the Pneumococcal Vaccination to the Resident and/or his/her Representative. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Immunization of Resident, undated, indicated the following: -All eligible residents will be offered the influenza and pneumococcal vaccines unless medical contraindicated Review of the facility policy titled Procedure for Pneumococcal Vaccination of Residents dated 1/28/22, indicated the following: -Each resident or their responsible party will be asked on admission…
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 · D2024-03-01 · 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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to monitor and assess the use of equipment being used as restraint for one Resident (#69) out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: -For Resident #69, conduct individualized monitoring and ongoing assessments for the use of a seat harness/ pelvic belt (used to secure the body in a wheelchair to prevent slumping or falling out of the chair) and a positioning wedge cushion (mobility accessory that is designed to improve posture and relieve pressure on certain body areas) after identifying the equipment were being used as restraints. Findings include: Review of the facility's Physical Management Policy, revised 2018, indicated: -It is the policy of this facility to utilize restraints only when clinically justifiable to treat the resident medical condition while maintaining the resident's highest practicable level of physical and psychological well-being. -The need for a restraint will be evaluated by 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 · D2024-03-01 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to re-submit a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR- is a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care. PASRR requires that: 1) all applicants to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility be evaluated for serious mental disorder (SMI) and/or intellectual disability (ID), 2) be offered the most appropriate setting for their needs [in the community, a nursing facility, or acute care setting], and 3) receive the services they need in those settings) when it was identified that one Resident (#104) out of a total sample of 25 residents, had a SMI. Findings include: Review of the MassHealth Nursing Facility Bulletin 169, dated October 2021, provided by the facility as their policy, indicated the following: -A Level I screening identifies whether an applicant for admission to a nursing facility has, or may have, ID, Developmental Disability (DD), and or SMI. -If the resident has a positive Level I screening, the screener must refer 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 before2024-03-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 failed to review and revise the care plan with the interdisciplinary team (IDT) and include the participation of the Resident and/or Resident Representative (RR) in care planning for one Resident (#93), out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to schedule a quarterly care plan meeting as required for Resident #93, and facilitate the Resident and/or RR's participation to review and revise the plan of care. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plan revised 2017 indicated the following: -The Interdisciplinary team (IDT) develops a comprehensive care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timelines to accommodate preferences, special medical, nursing and psychosocial needs identified in the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) and IDT. -The care plan is evaluated and revised as needed, but at least quarterly. Resident #93 was admitted to the facility in September…
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 before2024-03-01 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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 record and policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide the necessary Behavioral Health care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable mental, and psychosocial well-being for one Resident (#52) out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to provide Behavioral Health Services for Resident #52 when he/she displayed behavioral symptoms. Findings include: Resident #52 was admitted to the facility in August 2014 with diagnoses including Vascular Dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning, thinking, remembering, and reasoning, to such an extent that it interferes with a person's daily life and activities), other Behavioral Disturbance (in Dementia are often globally described as agitation including verbal and physical aggression, wandering, and hoarding), and Major Depressive Disorder (a serious mood disorder involving one or more episodes of intense psychological depression or loss of interest or pleasure). Review of the Minimum Data Set…
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 · D2024-03-01 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, record and policy review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain a medication pass error rate of less than five percent (%) for two Residents (#224 and #4), out of three applicable residents, out of 36 opportunities of medication administration observation. Specifically, the medication error rate was observed to be 5.56% when: 1) For Resident #224, the facility staff prepared the incorrect dosage of a medication requiring the surveyor to intervene to prevent the wrong dose from being administered. 2) For Resident #4, the facility staff administered medications beyond the required timeframe of one hour after the scheduled dosing time and close to the next scheduled administration time. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication by Route or Dosage, revised March 2017, indicated the following: -Verify Medication order on Medication Administration Record (MAR). -Check against Physician Order -Identify Resident -Explain procedure 1. On 2/29/24 at 8:45 A.M., the surveyor observed Nurse #4 prepare and administer the following medications…
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 before2024-03-01 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the Advanced Directive (an individual's wishes regarding medical treatment), in the medical record of one Resident (#93) out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the Advanced Directive documented in the electronic health record (EHR) conflicted with Resident #93's health care proxy (HCP) wishes as indicated on the Massachusetts Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST - a medical order form that converts an individual's wishes regarding life-sustaining treatment into medical orders). Findings include: Resident #93 was admitted to the facility in [DATE] with diagnoses including Hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of the Resident's Incapacity Pursuant to Massachusetts HCP Act dated [DATE], provided evidence that the Resident lacked the capacity to make and communicate healthcare decisions. Review of the Resident's HCP form dated [DATE], indicated that the form was signed by the Resident appointing 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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, record and policy review, the facility failed to adhere to infection control standards in order to prevent or control the transmission of infections for one Resident (#41) in a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure that Isolation Precautions (actions implemented in addition to standard precautions based upon means of transmission) remained in effect for the required duration for Resident #41, after the Resident tested positive for COVID-19. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Coronavirus (COVID-19) Policy, updated 5/16/23, indicated: -The facility would follow the most current Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MA DPH) guidelines to include MA DPH's memorandum titled Update to Caring for Long-Term Care Residents during the COVID-19 Response. -Discontinuation of Isolation Precautions would be determined on a case-by-case basis, in conjunction with . state . national . health authorities. Review of the MA DPH…
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 · F2022-10-05 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — widespreadPerform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
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, and record review the facility failed to ensure its staff performed COVID-19 outbreak testing for residents and staff as required, to stop the spread of infection. Findings include: Review of the COVID-19 Outbreak Checklist found in Appendix B of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health guidance titled Update to Caring for Long-Term Care Residents During the COVID-19 Pandemic Response, including, Visitation Conditions, Communal Dining and Congregate Activities, dated 6/10/22, indicated the following: If the facility identifies one new resident or staff case then the facility should take the following steps to mitigate any further transmission: -Testing all staff and all residents on affected units must take place as soon as possible. -If the long term care facility identifies that the resident or staff member's first exposure occurred less than two days ago then they should wait to test, but not earlier than two days after exposure if known. Review of the facility policy titled COVID-19…
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 before2022-10-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its staff implemented infection control measures according to State guidelines when the facility was in a COVID-19 outbreak period. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented isolation precautions, when there was a positive staff case of COVID-19 identified within the previous 14 days, on nursing units where residents resided, with some residents not up to date (UTD) with their COVID-19 vaccines. Findings include: Review of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) Guidance titled Update to Caring for Long-Term Care Residents During the COVID-19 Response, dated June 10 2022, indicated the following: If any resident or staff are confirmed to be COVID-19 positive within the past fourteen days, healthcare personnel should wear gowns and gloves for high contact care of all residents who are not up to date with COVID-19 vaccine or recovered from COVID-19 in the last 90 days, on affected units. Up to date…
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 before2022-10-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its staff provided dignified experiences for two Residents (#88 and #13) out of a sample of 27 total residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that its staff provided: 1) A dignified verbal interaction with Resident #88 when the Resident was yelling, and 2) A privacy cover for Resident #13's urinary catheter (tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) drainage bag, when the bag was exposed, containing urine, and visible for others to see. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled Resident's Rights, undated, included that each resident had the right to: - a dignified existence - privacy concerning accommodations and medical treatment 1. For Resident #88, the facility failed to ensure that its staff provided a dignified verbal interaction between the Resident and Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #5 when the Resident was yelling and the CNA yelled in return at the Resident. Resident #88 was admitted to 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 · D2022-10-05 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its staff informed the Health Care Proxy (HCP- designated person to make medical decisions on behalf of the resident if determined by the Physician to be incapacitated) of one Resident (#108) out of a total of 27 residents, of the risks and benefits of proposed care. Facility staff also failed to obtain consent prior to the administration of a psychotropic medication (one that alters mood/behavior). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Psychotropic Medication Management, dated April 2015, included the following: -obtain a Physician's Order for each psychoactive medication. -notify the resident or responsible party of the initiation of the psychoactive medication, and with any changes to the dose, and document in the record. Resident # 108 was admitted to the facility in September 2022, with diagnoses including altered mental status, Major Depression and Dementia. Review of the facility Smoking Evaluation and Safety Screen, completed 9/2/22, indicated Resident #108 was a non-smoker. Review of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-05 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its staff promoted one Resident's (#84) choice to consume a beverage of preference, out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure its staff contacted Resident #84's activated healthcare proxy (HCP) and Physician to determine whether the Resident could consume wine after the Resident verbally expressed his/her preference for wine. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled Resident's Rights, undated, included that each resident had the right to .self-determination . Resident #84 was admitted to the facility in May 2022. During an interview on 9/28/22 at 10:36 A.M., Resident #84 said that he/she had a preference for wine and that he/she had requested wine to drink while at the facility. Resident #84 said that he/she saw other residents receive wine and that when he/she asked for wine, staff provided cranberry juice and told the Resident it was wine. Resident #84 said that this occurred on multiple occasions and that one time when this occurred, he/she became very…
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 · D2022-10-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that its staff completely and accurately executed, updated, and documented the wishes of three Residents (#44, #108 and #36) out of a total sample of 27 residents, and their designated Health Care Proxy (HCP- an appointed individual to legally make medical decisions on a person's behalf if he/she became unable to do so) regarding advanced directives (a written statement of a person's wishes regarding medical treatment). Specifically, 1) The facility and its staff failed to include the resident representative for Resident #44 in the decision making process for advanced directives of life sustaining treatment and did not accurately record the advanced directives in the resident's record, 2) failed to properly and accurately execute and document the advanced directives for life sustaining treatment in the resident's record for Resident #108, and 3) also failed to ensure that staff identified and contacted Resident #36's appointed health care…
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 · D2022-10-05 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its staff provided notification of a change in condition for two Residents (#84 and #53) to the Physician/Non-Physician Practitioner (NPP). Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that its staff notified the Physician/NPP of a change in condition when: 1) Resident #46 expressed thoughts to facility staff of self-harm and wanting to die, and 2) migration [displaced- could be associated with various complications such as catheter malfunction, perforation (hole made by piercing), hemorrhage (bleeding), thrombosis (clot), infection, and stenosis (narrowing of the vein)] of Resident #53's peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC- long flexible thin tube put into a vein in the upper arm used to deliver medications and fluids) line, resulting in inability to provide ordered antibiotic therapy and requiring another invasive (procedure that enters the body, usually by cutting or puncturing the skin) procedure. Findings include: 1. For Resident #46, the facility failed to ensure that its 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-05 · 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
Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that its staff implemented their abuse prohibition policy for two Residents (#88 and #179) out of 27 total sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that its staff implemented: 1) the facility's established immediate action plan when Nurse #6 failed to ensure Resident #88's safety and remove Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #5 from the resident's room and care during an incident of alleged verbal abuse, and 2) the facility's established process for reporting when Resident #179 reported alleged sexual abuse between a staff member and a resident. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled Abuse Prohibition Policy, dated September 2020, included the following: - Each resident has the right to be free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of his/her personal property. - It is the facility's responsibility to identify, correct, and intervene in situations where abuse, mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, and/or misappropriation occurs. - 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 · Dcited before2022-10-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff included one Resident (#120) and/or the Resident Representative out of a total sample of 27 residents, in the care planning process as required. Specifically, the facility staff failed to include Resident #120 and/or their Resident Representative in the last two quarterly multidisciplinary Care Conference meetings, neglecting to communicate care planning information to the appropriate party. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans revised November 2017, included: -Care plans reflect resident preferences . -Care plans are a combination of The resident and/or family goals for treatment . Resident #120 was admitted to the facility in December 2020 with diagnoses including: Dementia (a loss of thinking ability, memory, attention, and other mental abilities), anxiety, and major Depression. Review of the Resident's record indicated a Health Care Proxy (HCP - a document with which an individual appoints an agent to legally make decisions on their behalf) was completed…
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 · D2022-10-05 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
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 its staff obtained necessary Podiatry (foot care) services for one Resident (#9) out of a total sample of 27 residents, resulting in neglected foot care. Findings include: Resident #9 was admitted to the facility in June 2022 with diagnoses including: Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Idiopathic Peripheral Autonomic Neuropathy (damage to peripheral nerves where a cause cannot be determined), and Left Hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body). On 9/28/22 at 11:11 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #9 remove both shoes from his/her feet while seated in a wheelchair. The surveyor also observed that the toenails on the Resident's left foot were trimmed, but the toenails on the Resident's right foot were overgrown and long. Review of the Resident record indicated a consent for Podiatry services to be provided by Associated Foot Specialists signed by the Resident on 8/25/22. Further review of the record indicated no Physician order for podiatry services. During an interview on 10/3/22 at 2:46 P.M., CNA #7…
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 · D2022-10-05 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure its staff followed professional standards of practice related to the proper care of a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC- thin flexible tube that is inserted into a vein in the upper arm and is guided into a large vein above the right side of the heart) and Midline Catheter (a tube inserted into the the peripheral vein in the upper arm with the internal tip located near the armpit/axilla) used for intravenous (IV- into the vein) antibiotic therapy for one Resident (#53), out of a total sample of 27 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to A) ensure a change in the external catheter length of a PICC was documented accurately and changes reported to the Physician per standards of practice, and B) to ensure monitoring and flush orders were in place for the care of a Midline catheter. Findings include: Review of the facility Infusion Therapy Order form provided to the surveyor by the facility, undated, included the following considerations for catheter care related to PICCs 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 · Dcited before2022-10-05 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its staff provided two Residents (#46 and #84) out of 27 total sampled residents, with needed behavioral health care, in accordance with their comprehensive assessments, plans of care, and standards of practice. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that its staff: 1) provided a qualified Practitioner to assess Resident #46 and develop/implement a plan of care for the Resident's safety when he/she expressed feelings of self-harm and wanting to die, and 2) obtained a Physician order for consultant Psychiatric services to evaluate Resident #84 prior to these services being provided to the Resident while at the facility. Findings include: 1. For Resident #46, the facility failed to ensure that its staff a) provided a qualified Practitioner to assess the Resident's safety, or b) developed and implemented a plan of care to address self-harm, after the Resident expressed thoughts to facility staff of self-harm and wanting 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 · D2022-10-05 · tag F0885 — failed to notify residents/families about COVID-19 — isolatedReport COVID19 data to residents and families.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on document review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff notified Resident Representatives and families of positive COVID-19 staff cases in the facility by 5:00 P.M. the next calendar day during the month of September 2022, as required. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled COVID-19 Pandemic Resident and Staff Testing last revised 3/16/22 indicated the following: Residents, Representatives and Families must be notified of every confirmed case of a resident or staff member and/or if a group of three or more residents or staff have a new onset of respiratory symptoms within 72 hour period (referred to as a cluster), by 5:00 P.M. the next calendar day after the occurrence. During an interview on 9/29/22 at 11:44 A.M., the Infection Preventionist said that the Administrator is in charge of sending out an email blast to families and representatives when there is positive COVID-19 cases in the facility. On 9/29/22 at 2:00 p.m., the surveyor and the Administrator reviewed the email notification that was sent to Resident Representatives and families…
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 · B2024-03-01 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately completed to reflect the status for two Residents (#64 and #69), in a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to accurately reflect on the MDS assessment: 1. For Resident #64, to document that the Resident had a visual impairment of Diabetic retinopathy (damage to the delicate blood vessels in the retina caused by poorly controlled blood glucose (sugar) levels in patients with Diabetes). 2. For Resident #69, to document that the Resident had a facility identified restraint during the seven-day lookback period. Findings include: 1. Resident #64 was admitted to the facility in December 2022, with a diagnosis of ESRD (End Stage Renal Disease -when one's kidneys no longer work as they should to filter waste and excess fluids from the blood) and Diabetes with ophthalmic complication retinopathy. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE], Section B: Hearing, Speech,…
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 · B2024-03-01 · tag F0868 — patternHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all required members of the QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) Committee participated in quarterly QAPI meetings. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that the facility Infection Preventionist (IP) attended and participated in four out of five quarterly QAPI meetings reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Policy, undated, states the QAA Committee shall be interdisciplinary and must be composed of, at a minimum: -the Director of Nursing (DON) -the Medical Director or his/her designee -the Infection Preventionist (IP) -and at least three other staff, one of whom must be the facility's Administrator, Owner, Board Member, or other individual in a leadership role who has knowledge of facility systems and the authority to change those systems. Review of the quarterly QAPI meeting attendance sheets, provided by the facility, included no evidence that the IP attended the following quarterly meetings as required: -1/25/23 -7/26/23…
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.
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ATHENA HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS — 22 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 | 1.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, per CMS)
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATHENA HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS MA III LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2014 |
| CHAKALOS-SANTILLI, VALERIE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 6% | since 07/01/2015 |
| MOSIER, MICHAEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | 7% | since 06/01/2014 |
| SANTILLI, LAWRENCE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 62% | since 10/11/2013 |
| CURTIS, DIANE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/01/2014 |
| KAUFMAN, DANIELLE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 07/01/2018 |
| REZENDES, LORRIE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 10/11/2013 |
| SENRA, PRISCILLA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 12/15/2020 |
| WHITCRAFT, CARLY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 05/01/2019 |
| ATHENA HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2014 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $954K 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
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 225283. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-10, 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.