West Side House LTC Facility
35 Fruit Street, Worcester, MA 01609 · For profit - Corporation · 91 certified beds · (978) 361-5032 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 improved from 1 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 15.6% | 16.4% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.5% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.3% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.9% | 1.8% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.9% | 15.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.5% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.9% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.0% | 15.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 35.3% | 19.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.5% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.6% | 21.2% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 65.4% | 21.4% | 17.1% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.65 | 1.88 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.82 | 1.50 | 1.80 | better |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.08 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 4% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims 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 — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 91 beds and averages 50.9 residents a day — about 56% occupied, or roughly 40 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 4.26 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.84 is at or above 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 3.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.46 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-12-30 · 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
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for food safety in the main kitchen to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illnesses to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food temperatures were taken and documented prior to meal service in the facility's main kitchen to ensure the food temperatures were within acceptable parameters for food safety. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Food Temperature Testing, dated July 2013, indicated the following: -Temperature of food items in the steam table are to be taken at the beginning of service and at the end of service using the following method: a. Sanitize thermometers by cleaning with alcohol wipes. b. Insert the thermometer into food items in steam table. Take reading and document on Daily Temperature Checklist for Meal Service form after temperature plateaus. -Temperatures are to be taken from the steam table for all three meals on a daily basis. During a kitchen observation on 12/27/24, the surveyor observed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-30 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right of residents to be free from physical restraints for one Resident (#2) out of a total sample of 14 residents. Specifically, for Resident #2, the facility failed to: -appropriately assess and re-assess the use and the need for a wheelchair seat belt used as a restraint when the Resident was seated in the wheelchair. -obtain informed consent and review the risk/benefits with the Resident's Representative for the use of the wheelchair seat belt, which was used to prevent Resident #2 from sliding off the wheelchair, increasing the potential risk of accidental falls and injury. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Device/Restraints Policy and Procedure, revised April 2017, indicated it was the policy of the facility to ensure each resident attains/maintains the highest practicable well-being in an environment that improves functional status and ability. The policy also included the following: -every 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 · D2024-12-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to adhere to infection control standards of practice during a bolus feeding (a method of tube feeding administering a dose of the formula through a feeding tube using a catheter syringe [syringe without a needle]) procedure for one Resident (#51) out of a total sample of 14 residents. Specifically, for Resident #51, the facility failed to: -appropriately follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP's: the use of protective gowns and gloves during high contact care activities that may provide opportunity for transmission of medication resistant organisms through staff hands and/or clothing), when providing high contact care for the Resident, increasing the risk of contamination and spreading infections to the Resident and other residents within the facility. -perform hand hygiene procedure as required between glove changes while providing care. -open/pierce a Jevity (therapeutic nutrition) container foil in a sanitary manner. Findings include:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-06 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and records reviewed, for two of three sampled residents (Residents #1 and #2), who were severely cognitively impaired and had court ordered legal guardianships in place, the Facility failed to ensure that staff implemented and followed the Facility Abuse Prohibition Policy when, on 10/17/24, although Nurse #1 and Nurse #2 were made aware of an allegation of abuse, that Resident #1 was at Resident #2's bedside engaged in a sexual act, neither of them reported the allegation to the Director of Nursing or Administrator, and as a result, they were not made aware until more than 12 hours later, when Nurse #3 became aware and reported the allegation. Findings include: Review of the Facility Policy titled Abuse Prevention Policies and Procedures, revised 4/2017, indicated that all staff members are responsible for reporting incidents that may constitute or lead to any form of resident abuse, neglect, mistreatment, exploitation or misappropriation. The Policy indicated that upon observation 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 · Fcited before2023-09-07 · 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
Based on observations, interviews and policy review, the facility failed to maintain professional standards for safe and sanitary food storage in the main kitchen and in two out of two kitchenettes. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Food Rotation Policy, dated 3/2023, indicated the following: -Label and date food items on food delivery day. Review of the 2022 United States Food and Drug Administration Food Code indicated the following: >Food shall be protected from contamination by storing the food: -In a clean, dry location. -Where it is not exposed to splash, dust, or other contamination. -At least 15 centimeters (six inches) above the floor. >Time/Temperature control for safety, cold holding: -Except during preparation, cooking, or cooling, or when time is used as the public health control, food shall be maintained at 5 degrees Celsius (41 degrees Fahrenheit) or less. On 9/5/23 from 7:55 A.M. to 8:15 A.M., the surveyor conducted an initial tour of the kitchen with [NAME] #1 and observed the following: -In the dry storage area, three bags of open pasta were…
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 · E2023-09-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and records reviewed, the facility failed to maintain a medication pass error rate of less than five percent (%). Specifically, the medication error rate was observed to be 31.03%, for two Residents (#34 and #18), out of three applicable residents, out of 29 opportunities. 1. For Resident #34, medication errors occurred relative to the administration of medications not given within the required timeframe. 2. For Resident #18, medication errors occurred relative to the administration of medications not given within the required timeframe and omitting a prescribed medication. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, General Dose Preparation and Medication Administration dated 1/1/22, indicated, but was not limited to the following: -Verify each medication administered: >is the correct medication >at the correct dose >at the correct route >at the correct rate >at the correct time >for the correct resident, as set forth in the facilities medication administration schedule. 1. Resident #34 was admitted to the facility in June 2020 with 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 · E2023-09-07 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and records reviewed for three Residents (#30, #17, and #4) out of five sampled residents for immunizations, the facility failed to offer or provide Pneumococcal Vaccinations as required. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1. Provide a Pneumococcal Vaccination for one Resident (#30) after the Resident's Representative requested the vaccination. 2. Provide education, assess for eligibility, and offer Pneumococcal Vaccinations per facility policy and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations to two Residents (#17 and #4) and/or their Representatives. Findings include: Review of the CDC website Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults greater than or equal to [AGE] years of age (cdc.gov) dated 3/15/23, indicated the following: For adults 65 and over who has had Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine 13 (PCV13) and Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine 23 (PPSV23), and it has been 5 years or greater since the last Pneumococcal Vaccination, then the patient and the vaccine…
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 · D2023-09-07 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess 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 records reviewed for one Resident (#7) out of a total sample of 13 residents, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA) Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within the required 14 days. Findings include: Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), Resident Assessment Instrument Manual (RAI-dictions used to code an MDS) dated [DATE], indicated the following: -The Assessment Reference Date (ARD) must be within 14 days from the effective date of the hospice elections (which can be the same or later than the date of the hospice election statement, but not earlier than.). -The MDS completion date .must be no later than 14 days from the ARD .and no later than 14 days after the determination that the criteria for a Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA) were met. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility in May 2022. Review of the Resident's medical record indicated the Resident elected Hospice services on 9/6/22. Review of the SCSA MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 records reviewed, the facility failed to implement a resident-centered, meaningful, and engaging activity program for one Resident (#23) out of a total sample of 13 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that staff offered and encouraged engagement in activities identified as being preferences for Resident #23. Findings include: Resident #23 was admitted to the facility in October 2016 with diagnoses including Unspecified Dementia and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated the Resident was severely cognitively impaired and needed assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs- include bathing, showering, dressing, getting in and out of bed or a chair, walking, toileting and eating). Review of the most recent Activity Assessment, dated 1/9/23, indicated the Resident's current preferences for hobbies/interests included: -exercise/sports -watching TV -ball toss groups. Further review of the Activity…
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 · D2023-09-07 · 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 observations, interviews and records reviewed for two residents (Residents #26 and #30) out of a total sample of 13 residents, the facility failed to ensure recommendations made by the Consultant Pharmacist during a monthly Medication Regimen Review (MRR) were reviewed timely and implemented as required. Specifically, 1. For Resident #26, the facility staff failed to implement recommendations for medication dosage adjustment and obtain lab work to monitor lipid levels and liver function timely. 2. For Resident #30, the facility staff failed to obtain lab work to monitor lipid levels timely. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Regimen Review, revised 8/17/23, indicated, but was not limited to: -The attending Physician should address the Consultant Pharmacist's recommendation no later than their next scheduled visit to the facility to assess the resident, either 30 or 60 days per applicable regulation. 1. Resident #26 was admitted to the facility in October 2018 with the following diagnoses: Dementia and status post Cerebral Vascular Accident…
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 · D2023-09-07 · 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 observations, interviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that medications were stored in a safe and secure manner and medication storage rooms were maintained in a sanitary manner. Specifically, facility staff: -stored Heparin flushes in an unlocked drawer of a resident's nightstand with availability to any resident having access to the room. - were using and storing personal food containers in the medication storage room, with risk of spilled contents and contamination. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Medications, revised April 2007, indicated, but was not limited to: -The nursing staff shall be responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner. -Compartments containing drugs and biologicals shall be locked when not in use shall not be left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others. -Drugs shall be stored in an orderly manner in cabinets, drawers, carts, or automatic dispensing systems. On 9/6/23 at 2:50 P.M., the surveyor and Nurse #3…
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 · D2023-09-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and records reviewed for one Resident (#23) out of a total sample of 13 residents, the facility failed to ensure an accurate medical record was maintained relative to Physician's orders for the care and services of a Foley urinary catheter (tubing inserted into the bladder to that allows urine to drain outside the body). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Foley Catheter Insertion ., revised October 2010, indicated the following: -Verify there is a Physician's order in place for catheter insertion (procedure) -Document the size of the Foley catheter inserted . Resident #23 was admitted to the facility in October 2016 with a diagnosis of urinary retention (inability for the bladder to fully empty). Review of the September 2023 Physician's orders indicated the following orders: -Change Foley catheter monthly 16 French (Fr-the size of the catheter tube) 10 milliliter (ml) balloon (a device that is inflated in the urinary bladder to hold the catheter in place) with a start date of 10/18/22. Further review of the September 2023 Physician's orders…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-12-30 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for one Resident (#19) out of a total sample of 14 residents. Specifically, for Resident #19, the facility staff failed to accurately code the use of an antipsychotic medication on one MDS Assessment. Findings include: Resident #19 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 with diagnoses including Paranoid Delusions. Review of Resident #19's December 2024 Physician orders indicated the following order dated 12/6/24: -Zyprexa (antipsychotic medication) 5 milligram (mg) oral. -Give 5 mg every night at 9 P.M. Review of Resident #19's MDS Assessment, dated 12/12/24, did not indicate that the Resident received the antipsychotic medication during the MDS Assessment observation period (12/6/24 - 12/12/24). Review of Resident #19's December 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated the Zyprexa medication was administered to Resident #19 during the observation period for the Resident's…
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 ELDER SERVICES — 6 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 | 5 of 5 | 2.2 | +2.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 2.3 | +2.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 2.3 | +2.7 vs chain |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CONNECTONE BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 10/10/2023 |
| ROMANO, FRANK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/10/1974 |
| ESSEX GROUP MANAGEMENT CORP | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/1995 |
| PICONE, SCOTT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/26/2002 |
| ROMANO, KATELYN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/08/2017 |
| ROMANO, KYLE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/25/2024 |
| SEMAAN, RITA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
| BAKER TILLY ADVISORY GROUP, LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/03/2025 |
| BAKER TILLY US LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/03/2025 |
| BOSTON HELPDESK, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/21/2025 |
| ESSEX GROUP STAFFING COMPANY | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/31/2007 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.
6 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 $601K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Massachusetts Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 225500. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-30, 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.