Life Care Center of Wilbraham
2399 Boston Road, Wilbraham, MA 01095 · For profit - Partnership · 123 certified beds · (413) 596-3111 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 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 fell from 5 to 4 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 | 7.1% | 16.4% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.6% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.6% | 15.5% | 6.5% | better 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 | 3.2% | 3.4% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.2% | 15.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.1% | 19.5% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.7% | 94.8% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.6% | 4.2% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.5% | 21.2% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.2% | 21.4% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.7% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.4% | 77.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.8% | 25.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.3% | 11.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.85 | 1.88 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.00 | 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.
59.7% 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 338 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 74.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 198 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 83% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 46% 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 | 59.7%CMS range 53.9–65.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.5%CMS range 7.0–12.4 | 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 | 74.8% | 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 | 68.7% | 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 | 72.7% | 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 | 99.2% | 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 | 86.7% | 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 | 1.2% | 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 | 2.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 5.3–10.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.94 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 123 beds and averages 114.9 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.83 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.35 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 3.43 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.00 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.43 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
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
33 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure three Unit ([NAME] Terrace, Hampshire Woods, and Hampden Gardens) kitchenettes were maintained in a safe and sanitary condition, out of three unit kitchenettes observed. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Cleaning Schedule, reviewed 4/30/24, indicated the following: -Equipment and Utensil Cleaning and Sanitization- A potential cause of foodborne outbreaks is improper cleaning (washing and sanitizing) of equipment and protecting equipment from contamination via splash, dust, grease, etc. -The Director of Food and Nutrition Services develops a cleaning schedule to include all equipment and areas to be cleaned. Review of the facility's Stocking List for Unit's Nourishment Room, updated 9/6/24, indicated the following: -Make sure to clean fridge, microwave, cupboards, and counters. On 3/5/25 at 5:02 P.M., the surveyor observed the following in the Hampden Garden Unit kitchenette: -Toaster was laden with crumbs -Inside the cabinet…
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 before2025-03-12 · 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 adhere to infection control standards to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections on one unit ([NAME] Terrace), out of a total of three units, affecting eight Residents (#167, #99, #75, #95, #62, #72 #170, and #50), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, 1. for Resident #167, the facility failed to ensure Personal Protective Equipment (PPE: items such as gowns, gloves, etc. to prevent the spread of infection from one person to another) was donned correctly, the surface used to set up treatment supplies was cleaned and disinfected before use, and that the scissors used to cut of an old dressing were cleaned and disinfected before using them to cut new dressing materials, placing the Resident at increased risk of contamination and infection. 2. for Resident #99, the facility failed to ensure that dressing materials brought into the Resident's room were not returned to the treatment cart for storage…
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 before2025-03-12 · 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 two Residents (#1 and #75), out of a total sample of 22 residents, were able to exercise their right to make decisions regarding their medical care when their Health Care Proxy (HCP: a document that gives someone the power to make healthcare decisions for a person who was unable to) was not invoked, and the facility had the HCP's sign advanced directives forms and consent forms. Specifically: 1. For Resident #1, the facility failed to ensure a Medical Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST: a medical form that outlines the wishes of a person with a usually serious, progressive health condition regarding life-sustaining measures and end-of-life care (such as life support, palliative care, or Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation [CPR]), and that must be signed by an authorized health care professional (Physician, Nurse Practitioner, or Physician Assistant) form was not signed by the HCP, when the HCP was not invoked for the Resident. 2.…
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 · D2025-03-12 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
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 reasonable accommodations of resident's needs and preference were provided for five Residents (#98, #75, #101, #169 and #72) out of a total sample of 22 residents and on one Unit ([NAME] Terrace Unit) of three units observed. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. answer call lights timely for Resident #98 and Resident #75 during the early morning times during shift change. 2. respond to resident call lights timely: a. on the [NAME] Terrace Unit. b. for Resident #101, resulting in the Resident being incontinent due to long wait times. 3. answer the Resident's call light timely for Resident #169, when he/she required staff assistance with mobility/transfers. 4. have staff respond timely to the call light for Resident #72, who required assistance to the bathroom and return to further assist the Resident after bathroom use as indicated. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Call System, revised 9/12/22,…
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 · D2025-03-12 · 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
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#62) of four applicable residents reviewed, out of a total sample of 22 residents, had the opportunity to formulate advanced directives and/or ensure that their wishes relative to advances directives were implemented. Specifically, for Resident #62, the facility failed to ensure that the Nurse Practitioner (NP) signed all required areas of the Medical Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Advanced Directives and Advance Care Planning, reviewed 9/26/24, indicated the following: -Residents have the right to self-determination regarding their medical care. This includes the right of an individual to direct his or her own medical treatment, including the right to execute or refuse to execute an advanced directive. Resident #62 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses including Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD). Review of Resident #62's Documentation of Resident…
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 before2025-03-12 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice relative to a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC: central venous access catheter inserted through a vein and can provide intravenous [IV] access for the administration of medications, parenteral nutrition or other solutions) for one Resident (#110), of one applicable resident who was receiving IV antibiotics, out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, for Resident #110, the facility failed to ensure: -accurate measurement and documentation of the external catheter length (measured from the catheter exit site to the 0 mark or, if no 0 mark is present, to the suture flange. Each line is measured as 1 centimeter/cm) and arm circumference. -identify a change in the external catheter length placing the Resident at risk for potential catheter related complications. Findings include: Review of the facility policy/procedure titled PICC Dressing…
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 · D2025-03-12 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice related to skin care for two Residents (#22 and #62), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -a new skin alteration was identified by facility staff and an investigation completed to determine the cause of the skin alteration for one Resident (#22). -weekly skin checks were completed for one Resident (#62) as indicated per their comprehensive care plan. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Area of Focus: Basic Skin Management, revised 11/21/24, indicated the following: -All residents have a head-to-toe skin inspection upon admission/readmission, then completed weekly, and as needed by nursing . -It is the responsibility of the Certified Nurses Aides (CNAs) and therapy department to notify nursing if a change of the resident's skin is identified . -If any new skin alteration/wound is identified, it is the responsibility of the nurse to perform and document an…
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 · D2025-03-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that necessary respiratory care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice were in place for one Resident (#4) out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, for Resident #4, the facility failed to ensure Physician's orders were in place for the daily use of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) machine and oxygen therapy. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled BiPAP/CPAP Administration Policy, revised 9/3/24, indicated the following: -When CPAP or BiPAP is ordered, the following must be included in the written order: a. Mode (i.e. CPAP, BiPAP, CPAP Auto set etc.). b. Pressure setting c. Size and type of mask (i.e. small, nasal, or full-face mask.) d. Liters of Oxygen (if ordered.) e. Frequency of use (example-at night when sleeping and with naps as tolerated.) Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in October 2020 with diagnoses including Complex Sleep Apnea. Review of the most recent comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 8/21/24,…
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 · D2025-03-12 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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 professional standards of care and treatment for hemodialysis (treatment that cleans the blood by removing waste and excess fluids when a person's kidneys no longer functioned properly) were implemented for one Resident (#15), of one applicable resident, out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, for Resident #15, the facility failed to ensure a Physician's order was in place for fluid restriction and documentation was maintained for the amount of fluid intake the Resident consumed during a 24-hour period when the Resident was receiving hemodialysis services. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Hemodialysis Offsite Policy, reviewed 9/6/24, indicated the following: -The facility and dialysis facility dieticians should coordinate the nutritional care including monitoring, documenting and deciding how and when to address weight changes in nutrition issues. a. This included identifying weight fluctuations due to fluid depletion between dialysis sessions, possible fluid volume deletion…
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 · D2025-03-12 · tag F0742 — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement recommendations made by the Behavioral Health Care Team for one Resident (#51), out of a total sample of 22 residents. Specifically, for Resident #51, the facility failed to ensure a recommended lipid panel (blood test that measures the levels of various fats in the blood stream) and Hemoglobin A1C (HbgA1c-test used to identify Diabetes [disease that affects how the body uses blood sugar]) labs were drawn as recommended by the Behavioral Health Physician Assistant (PA) for monitoring after the Resident was started on antipsychotic medication. Findings include: Review of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) website article (https://www.nami.org/general/why-screening-for-diabetes-is-important-especially-if-you-take-psychiatric-medications/), titled Why Screening for Diabetes is Important (Especially if You Take Psychiatric Medications), dated 3/25/14, indicated: -the American Diabetes Association suggests screening regularly for Diabetes for those who use medications to treat mental health conditions as…
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 23 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to limit the timeframe for a PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication to 14 days for one Resident (#40), out of a total sample of 22 total residents. Specifically, for Resident #40, the facility failed to ensure the PRN use of Trazodone (antidepressant medication) was limited to 14 days. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Psychotropic drug use, long term care {sic}, reviewed 5/20/24, indicated the following: -As-needed orders for psychotropic drugs should be limited to 14 days, at which time the prescribing practitioner should then review the order . Resident #40 was admitted to the facility in February 2025 with diagnoses including Depression and Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety. Review of Resident #40's March 2025 Physician's orders indicated the following order: -Trazodone .Give 25 milligrams (mg) every 24 hours as needed .start date 2/23/25 and no end date. Review of Resident #40's March 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated that the Resident was administered the PRN Trazodone on 3/2/25…
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 before2025-03-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 stored in a secure manner for one medication cart (Hampden Garden Long Hall Cart) out of three medication carts observed, out of a total of six medication carts. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that an injectible Insulin Lispro Pen was securely stored when the medication cart was left unattended in the hallway, and accessible to Unit residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications and Biologicals, revised 8/1/24, indicated the following: -Facility should ensure all medications and biologicals, including treatment items, are securely stored in a locked cabinet/cart or locked medication room that is inaccessible by residents and visitors. On 3/7/25 at 4:00 P.M., the surveyor observed the Hampden Garden Long Hall Cart was unattended with an Insulin Lispro Pen on top of the medication cart. The surveyor observed a resident wheeling past the cart with the unattended medication and into his/her room. The surveyor observed that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-12 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave 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 maintain a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Committee which included the required members at one out of four quarterly meetings reviewed. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the Director of Nursing (DON) and Infection Preventionist (IP) or a person designated to represent them were in attendance at the June 2024 quarterly QAPI meeting. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee, revised 8/30/22 indicated the following: >The QAA Committee 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 members, one of whom must be the facility's Administrator . Review of the Meeting Attendance Sign-in Sheet for the QAPI Meeting held on 6/17/24 failed to indicate evidence that the DON or the IP were in attendance at the meeting. During an interview on 3/12/25 at 10:48 A.M., with the Administrator and the DON, the Administrator said he…
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 before2023-12-15 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide required written notices of transfer or discharge for four Residents (#10, #88, #69, and #26) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically the facility failed to: -Provide written notice of transfer or discharge to the Office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman for Residents #10, #88, #69, and #26. -Provide written notice of transfer or discharge to the Resident and/or Resident Representative for Residents #69 and #26. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Transfers and Discharges, reviewed 8/9/23, indicated the following: -The facility will follow the limited conditions under which the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid has outlined how the facility may initiate transfer or discharge of a resident . 1a. Resident #10 was admitted to the facility in September 2023. Review of the medical record and Notice of Resident Transfer or Discharge, dated 10/16/23, indicated the Resident 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-15 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that residents were treated with dignity during communal dining in one dining room (Hampshire Woods) out of two communal dining rooms, and for one Resident (#87) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1. serve residents who were seated at the same table, their meals at the same time. 2. be in a seated position while assisting Resident #87 during mealtime. Findings include: Review of the facility procedure guide for Food Service and Dining, undated, indicated the following: -Serve residents who are at the same table at the same time. -If assisting a resident with eating, sit where he or she can see you. 1. On 12/13/23 at 8:32 A.M., the surveyor observed four residents seated at a table in the dining room located on Hampshire Woods Unit. Two of the four residents at the table had their breakfast meals and were eating, while the other two residents did not have their breakfast meals and one of the two residents without a meal was observed to reach out and try 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 · Dcited before2023-12-15 · 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 observation, interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to implement a care plan for one Resident (#69) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to consistently implement weekly skin checks for a Resident who was at risk for skin breakdown. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Skin Integrity and Pressure Ulcer/Injury Prevention and Management, reviewed on 3/31/23, indicated the following: -A skin assessment/inspection should be performed weekly by a Licensed Nurse. Resident #69 was admitted to the facility in February 2023 with diagnoses that included the following: Type II Diabetes (a condition where the body is unable to use insulin properly resulting in high blood sugar levels) with foot ulcer, and Hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and Hemiparesis (weakness of one side of the body) following a Cerebral Infarction (stroke) affecting the left side of the body. Review of the Resident's At Risk For Break In Skin Integrity care plan, initiated on 2/21/23, and revised on 6/7/23, indicated 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 before2023-12-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services that met professional standards of care for two Residents (#26 and #63), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1. Monitor serum (blood) levels of anti-seizure medications for Resident #26 resulting in breakthrough seizures (seizures that occur after they have been controlled with medications) and hospitalization. 2. Administer medications through a gastrostomy tube (G-tube: a tube surgically inserted through the skin and the stomach wall directly into the stomach and used to provide nutrients and medication) per professional standards for Resident #63. Findings include: 1. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility in September 2022 with a diagnosis of Seizure Disorder/Epilepsy. Review of the Nursing 2022 Drug Handbook, Wolters Kluwer, 42nd Edition, page 1495 titled Valproate Sodium (Valproic Acid, an anti-seizure medication) indicated but was not limited to: -Monitor…
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 before2023-12-15 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to act upon recommendations made by the Consultant Pharmacist during monthly Medication Regimen Reviews (MRR) for two Residents (#36 and #55), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure: 1. For Resident #36, that the Consultant Pharmacist recommendations were communicated to the Medical Provider (Physician/ Nurse Practitioner[NP]) pertaining to duplicate therapy related to anticoagulants (also known as blood thinners - medications that keep blood clots from forming). 2. For Resident #55, that the Consultant Pharmacist recommendations, accepted and modified by the Medical Provider were implemented as required. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Regimen Review, revised 8/17/23 included but was not limited to: -Facility should encourage Physician/Prescriber or other Responsible Parties receiving the MRR and the Director of Nursing (DON) to act upon the recommendations contained in the MRR. -For those issues that require Physician/Prescriber…
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 before2023-12-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 medications were stored safely and securely on one unit (Hampden Gardens), out of three units observed. Specifically, an unlocked medication cart was left unattended in the hallway on Hampden Gardens Unit, where it could be easily accessed by unauthorized staff, residents or visitors. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biologicals, revised 8/7/23 included but was not limited to: -Store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments .permitting only authorized personnel to have access. -Facility should ensure all medications and biologicals, including treatment items, are securely stored in a locked cabinet/cart or locked medication room that is inaccessible by residents and visitors. On 12/13/23 at 10:15 A.M., during an observation on the Hampden Gardens Unit, the surveyor observed an unlocked, unattended medication cart in the unit hallway. The surveyor also observed that a member of the housekeeping staff was mopping the floor next…
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 before2023-12-15 · 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
Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide a sanitary environment to prevent contamination and transmission of infections for one Resident (#87) out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to conduct appropriate hand hygiene while assisting Resident #87 with eating. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Dining Services, revised on 4/26/23, indicated the following: -Associates involved in dining services will wash their hands prior to distributing trays to the residents, when serving food to residents, and after handling soiled dinnerware and food waste. On 12/13/23 at 8:53 A.M., the surveyor observed Certified Nurses Aide (CNA) #1 assisting a resident with his/her breakfast by holding the eating utensil and bringing food to the resident's mouth. During an interview at the time, the surveyor asked CNA #1 how much assistance Resident #87 required during meals, she said that she usually helped the current resident with their cereal and then proceeded to Resident #87 to provide him/her…
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 · D2023-12-15 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, record review, and interview, the facility failed to administer the Pneumococcal Vaccine as required for one Resident (#55), out of five applicable residents putting the Resident at risk for facility acquired infections. Specifically, the facility staff failed to administer the Pneumococcal Vaccine for Resident #55 when an informed consent was signed by the Resident. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Influenza Vaccine & Pneumococcal Vaccine Policy for Residents, dated 1/25/23, indicated the following: -Each Resident is offered a pneumococcal immunization unless the immunization is medically contraindicated, or the resident has already been immunized. -The Resident's medical record includes documentation that indicated, at a minimum the following: a. That the Resident or Resident's Representative was provided education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of pneumococcal immunization, and b. That the Resident either received the pneumococcal immunization or did not receive the pneumococcal immunization due to medical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-05-13 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide 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 review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided the proper care and services for an external urinary catheter (a device used outside of one's body to collect and drain urine) for one Resident (#2) out of a total of 19 sampled residents potentially increasing his/her risk of urinary infection. Findings include: Review of the PureWick female external catheter manufacturer guidelines included the following information: - Assess device placement and patient's skin at least every two hours. - Replace the PureWick female external catheter every 8-12 hours or when soiled with feces or blood. - Change suction tubing per hospital protocol or at least every 30 days. - The collection canister, canister lid, collector tubing, pump tubing and PureWick urine collection system should be cleaned and disinfected at the time of each use, or at a minimum, daily. The power cord should be cleaned and disinfected at the time of each use, or at a minimum, daily. - The PureWick urine…
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 before2022-05-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility staff failed to ensure food items stored in the unit kitchenettes were dated and labeled in two out of three kitchenettes (Hampshire Woods Unit and Hampden Gardens Unit). Findings Include: On 5/11/22 at 2:00 P.M., the surveyor observed the following unlabeled and undated items in the Hampshire Woods Unit kitchenette: -2 plastic containers containing food in the kitchenette refrigerator -An open bag of cashews with an expiration date of 2020 in the cabinet At the time of the observation the Staff Development Coordinator said all items brought in for residents should be dated and labeled with the resident's name. She further said the two plastic containers in the refrigerator and bag of cashews were not labeled or dated, as required. On 5/11/22 at 2:37 P.M., the surveyor observed the following unlabeled and undated items in the Hampden Gardens Unit kitchenette. -A half consumed milkshake in the freezer -A half consumed ice cream cup in the freezer -A half consumed electrolyte drink in the freezer At the time of the observation Nurse #2…
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 · D2022-05-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure their staff promoted and facilitated Resident self-determination relative to manner of bathing for one Resident (#2) out of a total of 19 sampled residents. Findings include: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility in May 2021 with a diagnosis of end stage Multiple Sclerosis (a disabling disease of the brain and spinal cord which can cause vision loss, pain, fatigue, and impaired coordination). Review of the Resident's Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the Resident was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of a possible score 15. Further review of the MDS indicated the following: Section F, Daily Preferences, indicated it was very important for the Resident to choose between tub bath, shower, bed bath, or sponge bath. Section GG, Functional Abilities, indicated the Resident was totally dependent on staff for showering and bathing. Review of the Certified Nurse Aide…
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 before2022-05-13 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
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 staff provided a Notice of Transfer and Discharge to the Resident and/or the Resident's representative in writing upon transfer to the hospital for one Resident (#39) out of 19 residents sampled. Findings Include: Resident #39 was admitted to the facility March of 2022. Review of the Nursing Home to Hospital Transfer Form dated 3/29/22 indicated Resident #39 was sent to the hospital. Review of the Nursing Home to Hospital Transfer Form dated 4/18/22 indicated Resident #39 was sent to the hospital. Further review of the Resident's medical record indicated no documentation that Resident #39 and/or his/her Resident representative was provided in writing a Notice of Transfer and Discharge at the time of hospitalization. During an interview on 5/11/22 at 1:04 P.M., with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Admissions Director, the admission Director said nursing sends out the notice of transfer or discharge at the time a resident goes out to the hospital. The DON said she was unable to provide any documentation that 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 before2022-05-13 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 staff provided a Notice of Bed Hold Policy and Return to the Resident and/or the Resident's representative in writing upon transfer to the hospital for one Resident (#39) out of 19 residents sampled. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Bed hold/Reservation of Room, reviewed 8/7/21 indicated the following: The facility will provide written information to the resident or resident representative, the nursing facility policy on bed-hold period and the residents return to the facility to ensure that residents are made aware of a facility's bed-hold and reserve bed payment policy before and upon transfer to a hospital or when taking a therapeutic leave of absence from the facility . Resident #39 was admitted to the facility March of 2022. Review of the Nursing Home to Hospital Transfer Form dated 3/29/22 indicated Resident #39 was sent to the hospital on 3/29/22. Review of the Nursing Home to Hospital Transfer Form dated 4/18/22 indicated Resident #39 was sent to the hospital on 4/18/22. Further review…
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 before2022-05-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff developed/and or implemented care plans for three Residents (#2, #40, #92) out of a total of 19 sampled residents. Specifically failed to implement range of motion and stretching exercises for Resident #2, failed to develop and implement a behavioral care plan for Resident #40, and failed to turn and reposition Resident #92 at prescribed intervals. Findings include: 1. For Resident #2 the facility failed to implement range of motion (ROM) and stretching exercises as recommended by Physical Therapy (PT). Resident #2 was admitted to the facility in May 2021 with a diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis (a disabling disease of the brain and spinal cord which can cause vision loss, pain, fatigue, and impaired coordination). Review of the Resident's Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the Resident was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of a possible score…
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 · D2022-05-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility staff failed to ensure two medication carts were properly secured on one unit on two separate days. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 5/11/22 at 4:20 P.M., on the Hampden Gardens Unit, the surveyor observed an unlocked, unattended medication cart in the corridor, drawers facing outward with no nurse in sight and residents in the immediate area. The surveyor observed Nurse #3 in a resident's room out of sight of the cart. Nurse #3 said she should have locked the cart before walking away. During an observation and interview on 5/13/22 at 7:30 A.M., on the Hampden Gardens Unit, the surveyor observed an unlocked, unattended medication cart in the hallway with residents in the immediate area and Nurse # 1 in a resident's room down the hall. Nurse #1 said the cart should have been locked and was not, as required.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-13 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility staff failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations/irregularities were responded to timely and were documented within the clinical record for two sampled Residents (#40 and #84), out of a total of 19 sampled residents. Findings include: 1. For Resident #40 the facility failed to ensure the attending physician reviewed and responded to a Medication Regimen Review (MRR) recommendation made by the pharmacist. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility in January 2022. A record review indicated that a MRR had been conducted on 2/27/22 and indicated that the facility staff see the report for any noted irregularities and/or recommendations. Further record review indicated no evidence of the MRR report. During an interview on 5/11/22 at 3:04 P.M., the Director of Nursing provided a copy of the recommendation made on 2/27/22. The recommendation included a section for the physician to provide their response to the recommendation as well as their signature, both were blank. During a follow up interview on 5/11/22 at 3:22 P.M., the DON said that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-13 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility staff failed to ensure one Resident (#21) was evaluated for a gradual dose reduction (GDR) of a psychotropic medication (a medication that affects behavior and mood) out of a total of 19 sampled residents. Findings include: Resident #21 was admitted to the facility in March 2019. A record review indicated a Medication Regimen Review (MRR) had been conducted on 3/22/22 and included the following: -Resident #21 had received Celexa (an antidepressant) 30 milligrams (mg) daily for management of depressive symptoms since June 2020. -Please attempt a GDR to Celexa 20 mg daily Further review of the MRR indicated that on 3/31/22, the physician declined the recommendation and requested that the facility's psychiatric services evaluate the Resident for a GDR. Review of the Resident's clinical record indicated no evidence that Resident #21 had been evaluated by the facility's psychiatric services to determine if a GDR was appropriate at this time. During an interview on 5/11/22 at 10:269 A.M., Social Worker #2 said that she was not aware 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 · D2022-05-13 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility staff failed to ensure the accuracy of a medical record related to Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) for one Resident (#59) out of a total of 19 sampled residents. Resident #59 was admitted to the facility in October 2021. Review of the clinical record included a MOLST signed by the Resident's representative and the attending physician on 3/1/22 which indicated the following: no artificial nutrition and no artificial hydration. Review of the May 2022 Physician's Orders indicated: use artificial nutrition and use artificial hydration. During an interview on 5/12/22 at 11:30 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said the Physician's Orders did not match the MOLST, as required.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-03-12 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a Notice of Bed-Hold Policy and Return in writing to the Resident and/or the Resident's Representative upon transfer to the hospital for two Residents (#64 and #61), out of a sample of 22 residents, and for one Resident (#17) out of three closed records reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Massachusetts Bed-Hold Notification, dated 3/22/23, indicated the following: -The Bed-hold policy should be given upon admission, upon transfer of a resident to the hospital (if in an emergency within 24 hours) .The facility will provide written information to the resident or resident representative regarding the nursing facility policy on bed-hold periods and the residents return to the facility to ensure that residents are made aware of a facility's bed-hold and reserve bed payment policy before and upon transfer to the hospital . 1. Resident #64 was admitted to the facility in October 2024 with diagnoses including Dementia without behavioral disturbance. Review of the Nurse's Note, dated 10/4/24,…
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.
- No harm found · Ccited before2023-12-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure food in three unit kitchenettes (Hampden Garden Unit, Hampshire Woods Unit, and [NAME] Terrace Unit) out of three units observed was stored according to facility policy. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure that food stored in the unit kitchenette refrigerators included labels with the resident's name, room number and date. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Food from Outside Sources, reviewed 6/4/23, indicated the following: -Food stored in the unit refrigerator should be labeled with the resident's name and room number. On 12/14/23 at 1:11 P.M., on the Hampden Garden Unit kitchenette, the surveyor and Unit Manager (UM) #1 observed an unlabeled, undated can of soda open to air, in the door of the refrigerator. During an interview at the time, UM #1 said open to air items should not be stored in the unit refrigerators and that all items in the refrigerator should be labeled with a resident name 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.
“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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEVELOPERS INVESTMENT COMPANY INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/01/1993 |
| LONG, ZOFIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/15/2004 |
| LOPATA, DENNIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/19/2025 |
| SPARKS, JOSEPH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/06/2023 |
| CROSS, CINDY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/21/1994 |
| HENRY, TERRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/16/1999 |
| LAY, LISA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/09/2018 |
| SWANKER, RICHARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/01/2011 |
| THURMOND, JOAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/22/2000 |
| LIFE CARE AFFILIATES II | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/1993 |
| LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/19/2025 |
| WILBRAHAM MEDICAL INVESTORS LP | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/12/1991 |
| ELDER, ANN MARIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/19/2025 |
| FLETCHER, TODD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/13/2024 |
| PRESTON, AUBREY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/13/2024 |
| ZIEGLER, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/13/2024 |
| PRESTON, FORREST | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/28/1987 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.
4 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 $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225543. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.