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

Cove's Edge INC

26 Schooner Street, Damariscotta, ME 04543 · Non profit - Corporation · 76 certified beds · (207) 563-4608 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (207) 563-4608 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — 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
Worth asking about
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • about 23% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
79 Schooner St Unit 2 · (207) 563-4780 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
202 Main St · (207) 319-2795 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
323 Main St · (207) 563-5556 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Riverside Park · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 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 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased35.1%24.4%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.8%5.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder5.2%1.1%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.2%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.1%11.6%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.4%4.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened33.5%25.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.9%17.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.9%4.3%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control39.3%29.2%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table18.1%20.2%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.1%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.0%74.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.4%20.8%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit24.0%16.1%12.0%worse

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.

55.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 61 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

55.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
47.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.11U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

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

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.11 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 7% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 65% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF55.7%CMS range 46.2–66.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.5%CMS range 6.0–13.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge47.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge62.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge32.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified82.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting92.9%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.2%CMS range 3.0–12.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.661.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.89
RN hours/ resident / day
0.03
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.36
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.29
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.79
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 76 beds and averages 41.3 residents a day — about 54% occupied, or roughly 35 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 4.29 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.89 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.36 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 3.67 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.54 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.93 to 0.79 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-07)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-23)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's care plan was developed to reflect the current needs of the resident for 2 of 16 residents reviewed for care planning (Resident #3, #35).Findings:1. Resident #3 was admitted in January 2025 with diagnoses to include complete heart block and presence of cardiac pacemaker.Review of Resident #3's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/19/25, indicates presence of cardiac pacemaker. Review of Resident #3's physician orders revealed an order with a start date of 7/31/25 for St. [NAME] pacemaker.A review of Resident #3's care plan, revised on 11/3/25, lacked evidence that goals and interventions were developed and implemented for the pacemaker. On 1/7/2025 at 12:07 p.m. during an interview, Registered Nurse (RN) #5 reviewed Resident #3's care plan and confirmed that it had not been developed or implemented in the area of the pacemaker. 2. Resident #35 was admitted in November 2025 with diagnoses to 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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 observations, interviews and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner and failed to ensure foods were labeled and dated in the reach in refrigerator for 2 of 2 kitchen tours. (1/5/26 and 1/5/26)Findings:1. On 1/5/26 at 9:06 a.m., observation of the kitchen with the Dietician and the Food Service Director (FSD) the following findings were observed and confirmed.- The walk-in freezer ceiling had built up ice in front of the fans, the floor was littered with food and bagged food/packages including French fries, frozen yogurt/ice cream single serve cup and several packages of an unknown food product. Under the shelving unit was a built up ice mound in the right back corner. There were open unlabeled/dated bag of waffles and a bag of personal pizzas.- The stand up mixer had dried food/debris on the mixing arm, the protective cage and the shield. At this time the FSD and the cook stated the last time the mixer was used was Friday (3 days ago) for…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Control Program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection by failing to apply appropriate interventions including Transmission Based Precautions (TBP) and Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). In addition, facility failed to demonstrate staff competency for Infection Control in the areas of TBP and EBP in 2 of 2 units (Periwinkle and hummingbird). Findings: 1. On 1/6/26 at 9:52 a.m., during a medication administration observation for Resident #6 on the Periwinkle Unit with Certified Nursing Assistant-Medication Tech (CNA-M) #7, a Contact Precautions sign that indicated a gown and gloves are to be worn when entering the room and a Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) storage bag was hanging on the front of the door. At this time, the surveyor asked CNA-M #7 to verify the type of precautions in place, and CNA-M #7 stated Resident #6 is not on precautions but that his/her roommate…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide care for a resident in a dignified manner when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA#1) was observed transporting a resident in a shower chair when a resident wasn't provided a cover in a dignified manner exposing their bottom in a facility hallway (Resident #3). Findings: On 1/5/26 at 11:39 a.m., observation of CNA #1 transporting Resident #3 in a shower chair from Periwinkle Place unit, past the front entrance of the facility and nurses station down onto the adjacent unit shower room. Resident #3 had a sheet over his/her lap; however, his/her bottom was visible/exposed, hanging out from under the commode seat as well as his/her foley catheter. At this time, the surveyor intervened, discussing that Resident #3 was left exposed during the transport. CNA #1 stated he/she must have moved the sheet from his/her lap.On 1/5/26 at approx.11:45 a.m., the above observation was discussed with the Director of Nursing.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to review and revise the care plan by an interdisciplinary team (IDT), that included, to the extent possible, participation of the resident and/or his/her representative after each Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 16 residents reviewed for care planning (Resident #35).Finding:Review of Resident #35's clinical record revealed an MDS admission Assessment was completed on 11/25/25. Further review of Resident #35's clinical record lacked evidence that an IDT meeting was held within 7 days following the assessment.On 1/7/26 at 12:46 p.m. the above finding was discussed during an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Registered Nurse (RN) #5. At this time, RN #5 stated that she documents the IDT meeting notes in the resident's electronic medical record (EMR). RN #5 then reviewed Resident #35's EMR and confirmed that an IDT meeting was not held following the above assessment.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice in the area of medication administration and treatments for 2 of 19 sampled residents (Residents #35 and #2).1. On 1/6/26 at 11:56 a.m. observed Registered Nurse (RN#3) push the medication cart to R#2's room, proceeded to pull the medications out of the cart and then crushed them without verifying the medications to the resident's chart. The surveyor questioned the practice, but RN#3 stated she did it by memory and that the order is on the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR). Even after surveyor intervention RN#3 did not review the TAR before giving the resident the medications. On 1/6/26 at 12:00 p.m. the above finding was confirmed with RN#3. 2. Resident #35 was admitted in November 2025 with diagnoses to include heart failure and chronic lower extremity edema. On 1/5/26 at 9:05 a.m. during an interview, Resident #35 stated he/she needs help from the staff applying his/her compression socks…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection related to respiratory care for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Residents #24, #35, and #41). In addition, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were obtained and provided proper monitoring for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #6) receiving oxygen therapy and failed to ensure that physician orders were followed for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #24) receiving oxygen therapy.2. On 1/5/26 at 9:33 a.m. and on 1/6/26 at 8:14 a.m. a surveyor observed the following: Resident #24 seated in his/her recliner chair, wearing nasal cannula (NC) oxygen tubing, dated 1/3/26, with the oxygen concentrator set to 2.5 liters per minute (L/min). Resident #24's unbagged, undated NC oxygen tubing attached to a portable oxygen tank stored in the pocket on the back of his/her wheelchair. The nasal cannula prongs were in direct contact with the surface of the wheelchair. A review of Resident #24's clinical…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-10-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards, as is possible, related to a patient lift on 2 of 2 units (Periwinkle and Hummingbird) and for 1 of 3 days of survey. (10/21/24) Findings: 1. On 10/21/24 at 6:16 a.m., during a tour of the Periwinkle unit, two surveyors observed a Easy Way Smart patient lift, available for use, which was missing one of the safety clips on an arm. 2. On 10/21/24 at 6:23 a.m., during a tour of the Hummingbird unit, two surveyors observed a Easy Way Smart patient lift, available for use, which was missing one of the safety clips on the an arm. The surveyor reported the unsafe lifts to nursing at approx. 6:38 a.m. on 10/21/24. He/she stated that the Maintenance Director would be notified when he arrives. On 10/21/24 at 7:23 a.m., the above missing safety clips were discussed with the Senior Facilities Manager. On 10/21/24 at 7:26 a.m., observation of the Periwinkle easy lift to have both safety clips in place. On 10/21/24 at 7:33 a.m., during an interview, the Senior…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-10-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, facility policy, record review and interviews the facility failed to adequately ensure medications were monitored and stored at appropriate temperatures in 1 of 1 refrigerator observed. Finding: On 10/21/24 at 11:45 a.m., a surveyor observed the medication refrigerator temperature logs with Registered Nurse (RN). Review of these temperature logs from 7/2024 through 10/2024 showed temperatures were not being monitored properly, with the following information missing: > July 2024 temperatures are documented out of range for 30 out of the 30 days > August 2024 is missing temperature readings for 5 out of 31 days and temperatures are documented out of range for 31 out of 31 days > September 2024 is missing temperature readings for 3 out of 30 days and temperatures are documented out of range for 30 out of 30 days > October 2024 is missing temperature readings for 5 out of 21 days and temperatures are documented out of range for 21 out of 21 days reviewed. Facility policy and procedure for Storage of Medications dated 5/1/2018 states under procedure subsections J…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · tag F0825 — isolated
    Provide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitative services or obtain the required services from an outside resource that is a provider of specialized rehabilitative services for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for rehabilitative services. (#43) Findings: On 10/21/24 at 2:12 p.m. during an interview, Resident #43, stated that he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and thought he/she was there for rehab but had not seen anyone from Physical Therapy (PT) or Occupational Therapy (OT). Review of the medical record contained a Physician order dated 10/7/24 for PT and OT evaluation. On 10/22/24 at approximately 11:30 a.m., in an interview with the PT/OT staff that were working on the unit, a surveyor asked if they had provided therapy for Resident #43. They stated that they could not because he/she is waiting for an evaluation prior to starting his/her therapy. On 10/22/24 at approximately 11:45 a.m., in an interview with the Admissions Coordinator, she stated 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-08-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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, interview, and the facility's Food Receiving and Storage Policy, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner for ceiling vents, the surrounding ceiling, and a food disposal unit. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure foods were dated and labeled in the walk-in refrigerator and the walk-in freezer for 1 of 1 tour. Findings: Review of the facility's Food Receiving and Storage Policy (last reviewed 4/4/23) noted: II. Scope: he Dietary Director, Dietary Supervisor, and Cooks are responsible for receiving and storing all food and non-food items. These tasks are delegated as needed. III. Policy/Procedure: 6) All opened foods and beverages, prepared foods and leftovers are dated. On 8/7/23 from 9:10 a.m. to 9:50 a.m., a surveyor conducted an initial kitchen tour with the Food Service Director in which the following findings were observed: > There were 4 ceiling vents, along with the surrounding ceiling areas, that were dirty/dusty throughout the kitchen. These ceiling vents were above clean dish storage areas, food…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2026-01-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that clinical records were complete and contained accurate information for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for positioning and mobility (Resident #3).Finding:Resident #3 was admitted to the facility in January 2025 with diagnoses to include left hip fracture and left hip surgical repair.A review of Resident #3's clinical record revealed the following active physician orders:An order with a start date of 1/16/25 for Elevate affected extremity to prevent swellingAn order with a start date of 1/16/25 for Incentive Spirometer 10 x QH [every hour] while awake An order with a start date of 1/16/25 for Call for persistent or worsening drainage . Review of Resident #3's baseline care plan, initiated 1/17/25 states, L [left] hip surgical incision r/t [related to] Left femur fracture [NAME] gamma nail.my surgical incision will heal .by review date. A review of Resident #3's revised care plan indicated the focus, goal, and interventions were resolved on…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2024-10-23 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy, interviews, record review, the facility failed to label resident's personal belongings and keep them safe and secure for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for personal property. (Resident #15 and #34) Findings: 1. On 10/21/24 at 7:28 a.m., during an interview Resident #15 stated he/she is missing 5 nightshirts and has told multiple staff about this, and no one has come to talk to him/her about it. On 10/22/24 at 12:00 p.m., during an interview with the Environmental Services Supervisor, she states laundry only knows about 2 missing nightshirts. When asked what the process of finding missing items, she states they first check the resident's room, laundry room, and then other residents' rooms. If it is not found, they will call the family to see if they have taken it home. If they still cannot find the item, they will replace it if requested by family or resident. When specifically asking about Resident #15's missing nightshirts, she states they have not found it in laundry and have not done anything further. Resident #15's medical record contained a History 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2023-08-09 · tag F0732 — pattern
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the current daily nurse staffing information that includes the facility name, and a breakdown of the number of hours of registered and unlicensed nursing staff responsible for direct resident care in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors for 2 of 3 survey days. (8/7/23 and 8/8/23) Findings: On 8/7/23 at 10:00 a.m., during a facility tour, a surveyor observed that the nurse staffing information was not posted in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. On 8/8/23 at 9:30 a.m., during a facility tour, a surveyor observed that the nurse staffing information was not posted in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. On 8/8/23 at 9:45 a.m., in an interview, with the Director of Nursing (DON) stated that the daily nurse staffing hours are kept on a clip board behind the nurse's station. At this time, the DON confirmed that the daily nurse staffing listing was not posted in a prominent place that is accessible to residents and visitors.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
MAINEHEALTHOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 01/01/2019
MAINEHEALTH SERVICESOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF100%since 01/27/1997
ALAMO, AQUILINOIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
CRAFTS, LYDIAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
FOSSEL, LESLIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
FULMER, JACKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
GARREN, BRUCEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2016
HAMBLETT, MEAGANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
HASAN, SAMIRAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2017
MACK, RUSSELLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
MOORE, DOUGLASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
PINKHAM, JESSICAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
RUSS, ANDREWIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2015
SELL, LOUISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2018
SOUCY, DENISEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2015
STOVER, HOLLYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2015
WOOD, PETERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2015
ELKINS, KELLYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
FOX, TIMOTHYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
HASAN, OMARIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/01/2024
MUELLER, ANDREWIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/19/2025
NESBIT, MARVAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2016
O'DONNELL, SEANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
PRINTY, WAYNEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/16/2003
SHANKLIN, HEATHERIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/26/2025
WADE, CYNTHIAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/01/2015
BETTS, BROOKSIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
DOBBELSTEYN, CHERYLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/28/2025
HUNOLD, ROBERTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/28/2025
PATSTONE, ANDREAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2024
ROSE, KATHARINEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/31/2018
TUTT, DAWNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/27/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 62 rows in the source record cover these 32 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$7.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-76.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.0M
Related-party expense23% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 35%Medicare 4%Other / private 61%

This home reported $3.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% 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

$554per resident / day
operating cost
$16,850per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$314per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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 ME

Paying with Medicaid

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

Typical monthly cost in Maine
$13,976/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$14,904/mo
Nursing home (private)
$8,205/mo
Assisted living

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 205067. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-07, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next