Vantage at West Springfield LLC

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

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.

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.

43.6% 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 99 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 47.5% 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 40 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 168 beds and averages 115.2 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 53 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.54 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.63 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 3 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

32 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2023-10-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), whose Plan of Care indicated that he/she required physical assistance of two staff members for bed mobility, bathing and hygiene care ( which included incontinence care), the Facility failed to ensure nursing staff implemented and followed interventions identified in his/her Plan of Care while meeting his/her care needs. On 09/05/23, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 provided Resident #1 morning care, which included incontinence and hygiene care to Resident #1 without another staff member present to assist her. During care, after CNA #1 rolled Resident #1 onto his/her left side, CNA #1 stepped away from the bed and went to the doorway to call for the nurse, leaving Resident #1 unassisted, and he/she fell off the bed on to the floor, striking the right side of his/her head. Resident #1 was transferred to the Hospital Emergency Department for evaluation and diagnosed with contusions (region of injured tissue or skin in which…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · G2023-10-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was assessed by nursing to be at high risk for falls, and required physical assistance of two staff members for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care, the Facility failed to ensure he/she was provided with the required level of staff assistance during care to maintain his/her safety, in an effort to prevent an accident resulting in an injury. On 09/05/23 at approximately 8:30 A.M., Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 provided Resident #1 with morning care, which included assisting Resident #1 with bed mobility, as well as incontinence and hygiene care, and proceeded to do so without another staff member present to assist her. CNA #1 stepped away from the bed and out into the doorway, leaving Resident #1 in bed, which was in the raised position, on left his/her side, and unattended by a staff member. Resident #1 fell off the bed on to the floor, striking the right side of his/her head, was transferred to the Hospital…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  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 determine that a significant change in status/ condition had occurred and ensure that a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set [MDS] Assessment (SCSA) was completed for two Residents (#105 and #52) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to identify and complete a SCSA:1. for Resident #105, when a significant change of functional decline in several ADL areas and bowel and bladder continence occurred for the Resident. 2. for Resident #52, when a significant change in mood, toileting, and activities of daily living (ADLs) occurred for the Resident. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Comprehensive Assessments, revised March 2022, indicated: -Comprehensive assessments are conducted to assist in developing person-centered care plans. -Comprehensive assessments are conducted in accordance with criteria and timeframes established in the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User Manual. -Significant…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to review, revise and implement a person-centered care plan relative to assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs-self-care tasks like bathing, dressing, eating, toileting, transferring and continence which are essential for independence) for one Resident (#52), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, for Resident #52, the facility failed to assess and implement the Resident's request for the use of a commode for toileting in accordance with the needs, goals of care, and preferences that addressed the identified limitations in his/her ability to perform ADL's. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy, titled Activities of Daily Living, dated December 2020, included but was not limited to:To provide support, assistance, and encouragement to remain as independent as possible with activities of daily living, including hygiene, mobility, elimination, dining, and communication; and that the care and services…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that one Resident (#23), out of total sample of 23 residents was provided assistance with personal hygiene. Specifically, for Resident #23, the facility failed to ensure that the Resident, who required ADL assistance was offered and/or provided with grooming assistance for the removal of unwanted facial hair. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), revised December 2022, indicated:-A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene.-The facility will ensure a resident is given the appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living.-The facility will provide care and services for the following activities of daily living:<hygiene, bathing, dressing, grooming and oral care. Resident #23 was admitted…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  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 ensure that controlled medication (medication that fall under the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Schedules II-V, and have a potential for abuse) records were accurately maintained for a Controlled Substance Book on one unit (Unit Two) out of four units Controlled Substance Books reviewed.Specifically, the facility failed to accurately document the transfer, destruction, and removal of controlled substance medications (Oxycodone and Tramadol) for four residents in the Controlled Substance Book for Unit Two. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Disposal of Medications and Medication-Related Supplies: Controlled Substance Disposal, effective January 2024, included but was not limited to:-Policy: Medications included in the DEA classification as controlled substances are subject to special handling, storage, disposal, and recordkeeping in the facility in accordance with federal and state laws and regulations.-Procedures:<Disposition is documented on the individual…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that medications were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles on one unit medication cart (Unit 4) out of a total of four medication carts reviewed. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that four pre-poured medication tablets observed in a plastic medication cup and stored in the top drawer of the medication cart on Unit 4 was appropriately labeled to prevent accidental administration of the medication. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Storage of Medications, undated, included but was not limited to:-Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturers' recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. -The provider pharmacy dispenses medications in containers that meet regulatory requirements, medications are kept in these containers.-All medications dispensed…

  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 · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, and interview, the facility failed to adhere to infection control standards to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections during two medication administration observations on one unit (Unit 4) out of four total units. Specifically, failed to adhere to infection control practices when:1. Nurse #4 was observed picking up a medication tablet that was dropped on the surface of an un-sanitized medication cart with a gloved hand and administered the medication to a resident during medication administration.2. Nurse #1 was observed picking up a medication that was dropped on an un-sanitized medication cart with his ungloved/un-sanitized hands and administering the medication to a resident during medication administration. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Hand Hygiene, revised 2/23/22, indicated: -Use an alcohol-based hand rub before performing an aseptic task. -Before moving from work on a soiled body site to a clean body site. -After touching a patient's immediate environment. 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 · D2024-10-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interviews and records reviewed, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was cognitively intact and had the potential to be verbally aggressive, the Facility failed to ensure he/she was free from physical abuse by a staff member, when on 10/02/24 at approximately 12:30 P.M. (exact time unknown), Nurse #1 engaged in a verbal altercation with Resident #1 during which she grabbed his/her chin and reprimanded him/her for his/her behavior. Nurse #1 admitted to physically touching Resident #1 during the altercation. Findings include: Review of the Facility's policy titled Abuse Prohibition, dated as revised 02/20/23, indicated residents will not be subject to abuse by anyone, including, but not limited to, facility staff, other residents, consultants, volunteers, and staff of other agencies serving the resident, family members or legal guardians, friends or other individuals. The Policy indicated that physical abuse included hitting, slapping, pinching, scratching, spitting, holding roughly, kicking etc. The Policy indicated that physical abuse also 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop 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 and policy review, and interview, the facility failed to conduct interdisciplinary care plan meetings after the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed, and involve the Resident and/or Resident Representative in the care planning process for six Residents (#11, #1, #2, #23, #54, and #8), out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide evidence of a care plan meeting being held, or that the Resident and/or Resident Representative had participated in the care planning process following the MDS assessments completed: 1. For Resident #11 on 5/20/24. 2. For Resident #1 on 3/25/24 and 6/25/24. 3. For Resident #2 on 12/22/23, 3/21/24 and 6/20/24. 4. For Resident #23 on 9/8/23, 12/1/23, 2/23/24, and 5/25/24. 5. For Resident #54 on 5/20/24 6. For Resident #8 on 8/10/23 and 2/28/24. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Comprehensive Care Plan, undated, included the following: --Our facility's Care Planning/Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) in coordination…

  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 · Ecited before2024-08-06 · 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 policy review, the facility failed to adhere to infection control standards to prevent the potential transmission of communicable diseases and infections within the facility on two units (Unit One and Unit Four) out of a total of four units. Specially, the facility failed to ensure: 1. On Unit One, that staff wore required Personal Protective Equipment (PPE-clothing and equipment that is worn or used in order to provide protection against hazardous substances or environments) while caring for a resident on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), placing him/her at increased risk of infection. 2. On Unit Four, that a staff member wore a fit tested N95 mask appropriately. 3. On Unit Four, that staff correctly utilized and/or discarded/ disinfected the required PPE while caring for residents diagnosed with COVID-19 (a highly contagious respiratory infection) placing residents at risk of contracting the disease. 4. On Unit Four, that staff wore the required and appropriate PPE when assisting a COVID-19 positive resident. Findings include: 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-06 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed to address the medical needs for one Resident (#52) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Specifically, for Resident #52, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed that included necessary interventions and goals relative to the care of a pressure wound (injury to the skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure or friction). Findings include: Resident #52 was admitted to the facility in February 2022, and had a diagnosis of a Stage Two (2) pressure wound (partial thickness wound with loss of skin presenting as an open shallow ulcer) to his/her coccyx (tail bone area). Review of the Nursing Admission/readmission Nursing Assessment, Skin Integrity, dated 5/8/24, indicated Resident #52 had been readmitted to the facility following a hospitalization and he/she had a pressure wound to his/her coccyx. Review of the most recent comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 6/20/24, indicated that Resident #52 had an unhealed pressure wound. Review of the corresponding 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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.

Fines & penalties

$13,748 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $13,748 — penalty dated 2023-10-12

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to VANTAGE CARE — 10 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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.

This home reported $602K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MA