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

Life Care Center Of West Bridgewater

765 West Center Street, West Bridgewater, MA 02379 · For profit - Corporation · 150 certified beds · (508) 580-4400 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (508) 580-4400 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
711 W Center St · (508) 583-1100 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2 W Center St · (508) 588-8050 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
(877) 276-9637 · Call to confirm hours
Park
74 Pine St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased17.8%16.4%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.2%5.1%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.4%1.8%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.2%15.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.3%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.0%15.4%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.5%19.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.2%4.2%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control31.0%21.2%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.9%21.4%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.2%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.4%77.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.1%25.7%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.6%11.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.901.881.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.671.501.80better

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

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

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

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

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

67.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 845 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

67.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
88.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.60U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.29hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 88.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 387 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 0.60 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 42% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF67.7%CMS range 64.3–70.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.2%CMS range 9.2–13.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge88.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge87.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge80.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified98.7%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge99.7%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.6%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.8%CMS range 4.0–7.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.041.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.73
RN hours/ resident / day
1.12
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.98
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.83
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.38
RN hoursweekends
34.0%
Total nursing turnover
37.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 150 beds and averages 140.1 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.83 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.05 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-24)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-09)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-24 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), the Facility failed to ensure they maintained a complete and accurate medical record, although Resident #1 no longer required the use of a bed alarm, nursing continued to document on it's function and placement on his/her Treatment Administration Record. Findings Include: Review of the Facility's Policy tilted Nursing Documentation, dated as last reviewed September 05, 2024, indicated the following: -the Facility will ensure nursing documentation is consistent with professional standards of practice, the state nurse practice act, and any state laws governing the scope of nursing practice -long-term care facilities maintain clinical records for each resident and these records must be complete and accurate -document only the care actually provided Resident #1 was admitted to the Facility in July 2024, diagnoses included myasthenia gravis (weakness and fatigue of muscles under voluntary control), difficulty in walking, muscle weakness, hypertension, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the development and potential transmission of communicable diseases and infections for three Residents (#112, #40, and #53). Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #112, to ensure staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) as required for Isolation/Droplet Precautions (infection control precautions used for residents who are infected with certain infectious agents including COVID-19 for which additional precautions are needed to prevent infection transmission) while entering the room and changing linen on the Resident's bed and transferring the Resident back to bed; 2. For Resident #40, to ensure staff wore PPE as required for Enhanced Barrier Precautions while entering the room and changing linen on the Resident's bed; and 3. For Resident #53, to ensure staff wore PPE as required for Contact Precautions while entering the room and providing physical therapy. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-09 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services consistent with accepted standards of clinical practice for two Residents (#91 and #282), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #91, to administer Eliquis (anticoagulant/blood thinner) and Tramadol (opioid narcotic for pain) per the physician's orders; and 2. For Resident #282, to follow orthopedic recommendations of touch down weight bearing (TDWB- weight-bearing status where a person's foot or toes can touch the ground to maintain balance, but they do not put any weight on the affected leg) for the left lower extremity (LLE). Findings include: Review of the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Nursing Advisory Ruling #9324 titled Accepting, Transcribing and Implementing Prescriber Orders, dated as last revised 4/11/18, indicated but was not limited to the following: -Licensed Nurse accept, verify, transcribe, and implement orders from authorized prescribers.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-09 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such 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 provide adequate pain control for one Resident (#282), out of a sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to adequately assess and provide pain control, resulting in a three-day delay of additional pain medications being ordered by the Nurse Practitioner (NP). Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Pain Assessment and Management, dated 9/8/2022, indicated but was not limited to the following: -Based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, this facility must ensure that residents receive the treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive care plan, and the resident's choices related to pain management. -All residents will be assessed for pain indicators upon admission/readmission, quarterly and with any change in condition. -An individualized pain management care plan will be developed and initiated when pain indicators are identified. The care will be…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-09 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure it was free from a medication error rate of greater than five percent when one of two nurses made two errors out of 26 opportunities, totaling a medication error rate of 7.69%. These errors impacted one Resident (#91), out of four residents observed. Specifically, Eliquis (anticoagulant/blood thinner) and Tramadol (opioid narcotic for pain) were omitted during the medication pass. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Administration of Medications, dated as last reviewed 8/24/23, indicated but was not limited to the following: -The facility will ensure medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order to address resident diagnosis and signs and symptoms. -Staff who are responsible for medication administration will adhere to the 10 Rights of Medication Administration including the Right Time and Frequency and the Right Documentation. -High Alert medications include anticoagulants and opioids. Review of the active Physician's Orders for Resident #91 included…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in a safe and secure manner as required. Specifically, the facility failed for Resident #89, to ensure medications were not left unattended in the Resident's room. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Medications, dated January 2023, indicated the following: -Medications and biologicals are stored properly, following manufacturer's or provider pharmacy recommendations, to maintain their integrity and to support safe effective drug administration. -The medication supply shall be accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. Review of the facility's policy titled Administration of Medications, dated 8/24/23, indicated but was not limited to the following: - The facility will ensure medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order to address resident's diagnoses and signs and symptoms. -Medication administration is the…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-07 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record reviews, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff assessed one Resident (#108), out of a total sample of 25 residents, for self-administration of medications. Specifically, Resident #108 was not assessed for the safety of self-administration of medications, orders were not in place for the use of the medications, a care plan was not developed for the self-administration of medications, and several medications were observed to be accessible at his/her bedside. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Self Administration of Medications, last revised 11/28/16, indicated but was not limited to the following: - Facility, in conjunction with the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), should assess and determine, with respect to each resident, whether Self-Administration of medications is safe and clinically appropriate, based on the resident's functionality and health condition. -To ensure safe and appropriate Self-Administration, Facility should educate residents to ensure that a resident is able to: -State the name, dose,…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-07 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that staff provided care and services according to accepted standards of clinical practice for two Residents (#108 and #103), out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: 1. For Resident #108, Ace wraps (elastic bandage wrap used to relieve swelling and avoid constriction) were applied to Resident #108's legs as ordered by the physician and accurately documented in the medical record; and 2. For Resident #103, the refused medications were disposed as per the facility policy and standards of practice. Findings include: 1. Resident #108 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 with diagnoses including venous stasis dermatitis of both lower extremities. Review of the medical record indicated a 5/22/23 Nurse Practitioner's (NP) note indicating Resident #108 developed left lower extremity cellulitis and began antibiotic treatment on 5/22/23. Review of a 5/23/23 NP's note indicated Resident #108 developed cellulitis to the right lower extremity as well and ordered Ace…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-07 · tag F0694 — isolated
    Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented physician's orders for a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC- a long catheter inserted through a peripheral vein then into a larger vein to administer intravenous (IV) treatments over a long period of time) for one Resident (#524), out of a total sample of one resident. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff: 1. Changed the PICC line dressing and 2. Measured the upper arm circumference consistent with professional standards of practice and facility policy. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Peripherally Inserted Central Line Catheter (PICC), dated 08/2021, indicated but was not limited to the following: - Verification of correct tip placement in the SVC should be completed by x-ray or other approved technologies before starting infusion. If transferred with line in place, obtain written report of tip verification as part of pre-admission screening process. - Measure circumference of upper arm before insertion as a baseline and when clinically…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided the necessary respiratory care and services for two Residents (#108 and #471), out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure oxygen equipment (nebulizer tubing and masks) was properly stored. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Administration/Safety/Storage/Maintenance, last reviewed 10/7/22, included but was not limited to: -Infection Control: store respiratory supplies in bag labeled with resident's name when not in use. 1. Resident #108 was admitted to the facility in May 2023 with diagnoses including asthma. Review of the June 2023 Physician's Orders indicated: -Albuterol Sulfate Inhalation Nebulization Solution (2.5 milligrams (mg)/3 milliliters) 0.083%, 2.5 mg inhale orally via nebulizer every 4 hours as needed for cough/shortness of breath (5/19/23) Review of the May 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated Resident #108's last administration of Albuterol via the nebulizer was 5/31/23 at 2:23 P.M. During…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-07 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have a schedule of hospice services, including involvement and collaboration of the coordinated plan of care for one Resident (#77), out of sample of 27 residents. Findings include: Resident #77 was admitted to the facility in July 2018 with diagnoses which included cerebral vascular accident with right side hemiparesis (stroke with right side weakness). Review of Resident #77's current Physician's Orders included: -Admit to hospice, date ordered, 12/13/22. Review of the Hospice Services Agreement, dated 12/7/22, with the elected hospice provider indicated but was not limited to: the Hospice plan of care shall reflect the participation of Hospice, Facility, Hospice Patient and Patient's family to the extent possible. The plan of care must identify the care and services that are needed and specify which provider is responsible for performing the respective functions. Review of the medical record indicated a Hospice IDG Comprehensive Assessment and Plan of Care with a benefit period of 3/13/23 through 6/10/23. The plan 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.4+1.6 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.8+2.2 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.5+0.5 vs chain
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
1 of 5Garden Terrace At Overland ParkOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Hammond-Whiting Care CenterWhiting, IN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of AndoverAndover, KS 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Cape GirardeauCape Girardeau, MO 1 of 5Life Care Center Of GrayGray, TN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of HixsonHixson, TN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Mount VernonMount Vernon, WA 1 of 5Life Care Center Of RenoReno, NV 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Sierra VistaSierra Vista, AZ 1 of 5Life Care Center Of The WillowsValparaiso, IN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of TucsonTucson, AZ 1 of 5Life Care Center of Coeur d'AleneCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Life Care Center of ElkhornElkhorn, NE 1 of 5Life Care Center of Hilton HeadHilton Head Island, SC 1 of 5Life Care Center of OmahaOmaha, NE 1 of 5Life Care Center of PlainwellPlainwell, MI 1 of 5Life Care Ctr Of LawrencevilleLawrenceville, GA 1 of 5Rensselaer Care CenterRensselaer, IN 2 of 5Canon Lodge Care CenterCanon City, CO 2 of 5Darcy Hall Of Life CareWest Palm Beach, FL 2 of 5Desert Cove Nursing CenterChandler, AZ 2 of 5Evergreen Nursing HomeAlamosa, CO 2 of 5Garden Terrace Healthcare Center of HoustonHouston, TX 2 of 5Hallmark ManorFederal Way, WA 2 of 5Lane House, TheCrawfordsville, IN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Altamonte SpringsAltamonte Springs, FL 2 of 5Life Care Center Of AthensAthens, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of BridgetonBridgeton, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of BrookfieldBrookfield, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of ClevelandCleveland, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of ColumbiaColumbia, SC 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Coos BayCoos Bay, OR 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Federal WayFederal Way, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of GrandviewGrandview, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of KirklandKirkland, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Merrimack ValleyBillerica, MA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Morgan CountyWartburg, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of PuyallupPuyallup, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Red BankChattanooga, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of South Las VegasLas Vegas, NV

Showing 40 of 193; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
DEVELOPERS INVESTMENT COMPANY INCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/16/1994
PRESTON, FORRESTIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/16/1994
LAFLEUR, NANCYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/28/2024
LONG, ZOFIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/15/2004
PERRY, KELLIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/24/2025
LAY, LISAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/09/2018
SWANKER, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2022
CROSS, CINDYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/1995
HENRY, TERRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/16/1999
THURMOND, JOANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/22/2000
LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/24/2025
FLETCHER, TODDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/13/2024
PRESTON, AUBREYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/13/2024
TOOSSI, ALIREZAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/07/2025
ZIEGLER, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/13/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$22.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+9.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.9M
Related-party expense14% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 41%Medicare 36%Other / private 23%

This home reported $2.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$435per resident / day
operating cost
$13,238per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$481per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225704. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next