Cummings Health Care Facility

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 27% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 29% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 34 beds and averages 31.0 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.10 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.82 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.87 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 3.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.22 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.68 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

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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-03-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide necessary assistance to prevent accidents by failing to ensure that a two-person mechanical lift assist was provided during transfer for 1 of 1 resident (Resident#1 [R1]) reviewed for an incident with injury. This fall resulted in R1 falling during an improper transfer from bed to shower chair and R1 sustaining a fractured left arm and left ankle. Findings: On 3/5/24, R1's clinical record was reviewed. The record indicated R1 was diagnosed with dementia, weakness, neuropathy, limited mobility, and other morbidities. On 12/7/23 at 1:30 p.m., a nurse note indicated: C.N.A.1 had another staff member tell writer (Registered Nurse [RN]) to come to residents' room immediately. Resident was laying supine on floor by his/her bed, C.N.A.1 stated that one corner of the Hoyer sling came undone and resident fell to the floor hitting his/her left shoulder and leg. Resident complained of severe left leg/shoulder pain. On 12/12/23, the Nurse Practitioner…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · F2025-06-11 · tag F0801 — widespread
  Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Food Service Supervisor (FSS) met the qualifications of a Certified Food Service Director. This had the potential to affect all the residents (32 residents). Finding: On 6/9/25 at 10:45 a.m., during an interview with a surveyor, the FSS stated that she has been in this role for about one year. She stated that she does not have the qualifications for the job and that she is currently not enrolled in any qualifying course or a Managerial Servsafe course. She then stated the facility's dietician is on a consultant basis and comes in monthly. On 6/11/25 at 2:00 p.m., during an interview with the Administrator, the surveyor confirmed that the facility has failed to have a qualified Food Service Supervisor and uses a consultant dietician who is not employed by the facility in a full-time position.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-06-11 · tag F0851 — widespread
  Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews related to mandatory submission of staffing information, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate direct care staffing information based on payroll data was submitted to CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) for fiscal year quarter 2 2025 (January 1 - March 31, 2025). This has the potential to affect all residents (32 Residents). Findings: Interview with the Administrator on 6/9/25 at 10:30 a.m. revealed that he/she is the responsible person for the submission to CMS of staffing information based on payroll data. A document titled PBJ Staffing Data Report CASPER (Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Report) 1705D FY (Fiscal Year) Quarter 2 2025 (January 1 -March 31) states that the facility Failed to Submit Data for the Quarter was triggered. Triggered' was defined as no data submitted for quarter. A facility document titled Daily Census, printed 6/9/25, documented there were 32 residents living in the facility. On 6/9/25 at 10:15 a.m. in an interview with a surveyor, the Administrator stated there were 32 residents…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to promote care for residents in a manner that maintains the resident's dignity and respect during resident observations on 2 of 3 days of survey (6/9/25 and 6/10/25) (Resident #27 [R27], and R12). Findings: 1. On 6/9/25 at approximately 1:30 p.m., staff were observed assisting R27 who is dependent on staff for all Activities of Daily Living tasks, with personal incontinence care. It was observed from the hallway by a surveyor that R27 was being asked to roll on their side for the staff to perform incontinence care. At this time the surveyor observed the privacy curtain was closed but the window curtains were open, and the window was facing the parking lot, potentially exposing R27. On 6/9/25 at 1:35 p.m. the surveyor asked the charge nurse to observe the task being conducted with R27. At this time the Surveyor confirmed the window curtain was not closed and R27 was exposed to the parking lot while receiving incontinence care. The charge nurse closed the window curtains at this time and informed staff to ensure 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on facility policy review, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that the resident and/or resident representative received assistance/follow up assistance to complete the written information provided concerning the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment and/or formulate an advanced directive, or appoint a surrogate, for 1 of 16 residents reviewed for advanced directives. (Resident #22 [R22]). Finding: Review of facility policy Advanced Directives under the Optional Section: We will assist you to make an Advanced Directive . and by answering your questions about the forms. These services are available from the Social Service Director. On 6/11/25, a review of R22's electronic medical record was completed. The medical record lacked evidence that the facility offered assistance or followed up with the resident and/or resident representative concerning the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment and to ensure the completion of the resident's advanced directive wishes.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident's physician was notified of a significant health change/abnormal lab result with a dieticians recommendation for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #23 [R23]). Finding: On 6/9/25 at 1:44 p.m. R23's clinical record was reviewed, a nutrition/dietary note documented that R23 has a low albumin level with a suggestion/recommendation for 2 scoops of protein powder to be added to a beverage or soft vegetable such as mashed potato daily. Further review of R23's clinical record indicated that on 3/19/25 the facility wrote a communication to the provider with the problem listed as Albumin 3.0 and asked if they could get a diagnosis for protein/calorie malnutrition. On 3/19/25 R23 had the new diagnosis of protein/calorie malnutrition and was added to his/her diagnosis list. On 6/10/25 at 3:08 p.m. during an interview with a surveyor, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated that if the dietician made a recommendation/suggestion we would write it on a communication form for the provider and get an order. She stated…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · 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 clinical record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to follow physician orders for 1 of 16 residents reviewed. (Resident #30 [R30]). Finding: On 6/10/25 at 11:44 a.m., during a clinical record review for R30 there is documentation that shows he/she had an order dated 5/29/25 for Boost (supplement) twice a day between meals with a diagnosis of protein, calorie malnutrition. The clinical record lacks evidence that R30 has received this supplement. During this clinical record review a physician progress note dated 6/2/25 that documents that R30 also has protein-calorie malnutrition with albumin of 2.6, decreased from 2.9 in February. Boost nutritional supplements twice daily was added to her regimen to increase caloric intake. The provider was not aware that R30 was not receiving the Boost supplement as ordered. A physician progress note dated 6/9/25 addresses R30's protein-calorie malnutrition and documents the Continuing nutritional supplement twice daily. Consider adding lactase enzyme before meals if there is any discomfort following meals. At this time R30 still…

  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 · D2025-06-11 · tag F0711 — isolated
  Ensure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the physician reviewed the resident's total program of care, which included signing orders for medications and treatments listed on the Physician Orders in a timely manner for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #14 [R14], and R23). Findings: 1. On 6/10/25, R14's clinical record was reviewed. A review of the physician visits and medication orders indicated that on 2/10/25, the first required 30-day physician visit (for a newly admitted resident) was completed and R14's admission orders were signed. On 2/24/25, the physician made a visit and medication orders signed. On 3/26/25, the second required 30-day physician visit (for a newly admitted resident) was completed and the medication orders signed. On 4/26/25, the third required 30-day physician visit was completed, but there was no evidence that the medication orders were signed at that visit. On 6/11/25 at 8:15 a.m., during an interview with the surveyor, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that on 4/26/25 the physician made 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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · tag F0849 — isolated
  Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to incorporate in a care plan the collaboration and responsibilities shared by the facility and Hospice for 1 of 2 Hospice residents reviewed (Resident #5 [R5]). Finding: On 6/10/25, a review of R5's clinical record was completed. Documentation in R5's clinical record indicated R5 is receiving Hospice services. Documentation in R5's care plan had a problem for terminal cancer and the name of the Hospice organization. There was no evidence of goals or interventions that indicated the collaboration of care between the facility and Hospice and there was no evidence of interventions that identified and directed the care between the two. On 6/10/25 at 2:00 p.m., in an interview with the surveyor, the Director of Nursing confirmed that Hospice responsibilities was not integrated in with facility care plan.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-17 · 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 observations and interview, the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner on 1 of 3 survey days, and the facility failed to keep accurate and complete temperature logs of the walk-in refrigerator, walk-in freezer, and refrigerator/freezer in the kitchen (7/15/24). Findings: On 7/15/24 from 10:35 a.m. through 11:10 a.m. during the initial observation of the kitchen with the Food Safety Supervisor (FSS), it was observed: 1. Thirty chocolate Hormel Magic dessert cups and thirty-five vanilla Hormel Magic dessert cups in the freezer portion of the refrigerator/freezer had a thick buildup of ice crystals around them, and one chocolate Hormel Magic dessert cup was open. Approximately half of the dessert cups were affected by the thick buildup of ice crystals. 2. Two large bins/containers of white dry substances (flour and sugar per interview during observation with the FSS) not labeled or dated in kitchen to the left of the oven. 3. One bag of confectioner sugar open and not dated, and one large open box of chocolate chips in an open bag inside the box, not sealed, and…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop a water management program to prevent the growth and spread of legionella and other water-borne pathogens, and the facility failed to develop policy and procedures for enhanced barrier precautions to reduce the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms. Findings: 1. On 7/16/24 at 1:36 p.m., a surveyor and the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) reviewed the facility's infection control policies. The DON stated there is not a policy for enhanced barrier precautions. The surveyor confirmed at this time that the facility did not have policy and procedures for enhanced barrier precautions to reduce the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms 2. On 7/16/24 at 1:36 p.m., in an interview with a surveyor, the DON stated not knowing of a water management policy for legionella and directed the surveyor to the Administrator. On 7/17/24 at 8:27 a.m., in an interview with a surveyor, the Maintenance Technician stated he did not know of a program that identifies where standing water would be and referred to the…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$8,824 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,824 — penalty dated 2024-03-05

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

What families pay in ME